251-bed student accommodation at 2 Victor Street, Southampton

Site and surroundings

The vacant, previously developed town-centre site was formerly occupied by a children’s play centre and is surrounded by mixed uses and buildings.

“The site lies within the boundary of Shirley Town Centre, on the south side of Victor Street at its junction with Crown Street. It was formerly occupied by a part one-, part two- and part three-storey building in use as a privately operated children’s play centre. That building has since been demolished and the site now comprises a vacant plot enclosed by timber construction hoardings. Vehicular access to the site is taken from Crown Street along the southern boundary.”

“The immediate character of the surrounding area is mixed, comprising a range of building types and uses. These include residential properties (predominantly flatted development on the opposite side of Victor Street), a doctor’s surgery, a primary school, purpose-built retail units and large surface level car park within the Town Centre precinct, and the adjacent Salvation Army Hall.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions covered flats on the site, but the approved scheme was never implemented and later lapsed.

“A revised outline application (ref: 19/01606/OUT) was subsequently submitted for the erection of a part 6-storey and part 5-storey building comprising 45 flats (5 three-bedroom, 6 two-bedroom and 34 one-bedroom units), following demolition of the existing buildings. This application was approved on 7 July 2020, subject to planning conditions and the completion of a Section 106 agreement.”

“Reserved matters were subsequently approved under ref: 21/00994/REM on 18 October 2021. A copy of the approved plans for this scheme are appended at Appendix 4. The scheme was never implemented, and has now lapsed, but showed that additional height and a car free development were previously acceptable for this town centre scheme.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to a legal agreement and conditions, concluding that the development complied with policy and its benefits outweighed its impacts.

“Delegate to the Director of Transport and Planning to grant planning permission subject to the planning conditions recommended at the end of this report and the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement to secure:”

“In the event that the legal agreement is not completed within a reasonable period following the Panel meeting, the Director of Transport and Planning be authorised to refuse permission on the ground of failure to secure the provisions of the Section 106 Legal Agreement.”

Officer report

Main planning issues

The report assessed student housing need, design, neighbouring amenity, parking, fire safety, sustainability, habitats and the planning balance.

“The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: - The principle of development - Design and effect on character - Neighbouring amenity - Quality of living environment - Parking highways and transport - Fire Safety - Sustainability and the Green Charter - Mitigation of direct local impacts - Likely effect on designated habitats & Biodiversity Net Gain - Planning Balance…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Most consultees raised no objection, while Housing Services objected over parking pressure and Natural England objected over protected-site impacts.

“With regards to the potential for overspill parking, there is limited unrestricted on-street parking provision within the area. The off street provision is a combination of Council car parks (managed by Pay & Display 8am to 8pm Monday to Sunday), the Sainsbury’s car park (privately operated - 90 minutes maximum stay) and SCC Housing-owned car parks.”

“The car parks within Ridding Close are owned and maintained by the Council’s Housing service and are not intended to serve new development. Concern is raised that any assumption that these areas could accommodate overspill parking from the proposed student scheme would place additional pressure on already well-used facilities.”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Representations raised concerns about overdevelopment, height, amenity, noise, parking, highways, community balance and the suitability of student accommodation.

“Inappropriate location for purpose-built student housing: This site is not within an established student housing cluster nor in a location that has been identified as suitable for largescale student accommodation. Introducing a development of this size risks undermining the balance of the local community and concentrating student use in an area not planned for it.”

“Impact on community balance and local services: The concentration of 251 students in a single block risks disrupting the mix and balance of the local community. It may also place additional pressure on local services, including waste collection and community infrastructure. These impacts have not been fully assessed or mitigated.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Local residents, the agent, the architect and a ward councillor addressed the Panel, while further written statements were received.

What the Panel considered

The presenting officer said the representations repeated concerns already assessed and introduced no new material planning considerations.

“The presenting officer reported an update with a variation to an existing and an addition of a new condition as set out further below.”

“The presenting officer reported that the representations largely reiterate concerns already summarised within the report regarding the height and scale of the building, overdevelopment, overlooking and overshadowing of neighbouring properties, parking pressure, traffic impacts, highway safety, and the suitability of the site for student accommodation. Additional concerns were expressed regarding impacts on elderly residents.”

Minutes

The vote

The Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment and carried the amended recommendation, with three votes for, two against and one abstention.

“Upon being put to the vote the Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment.”

“The Panel then considered the recommendation that authority be delegated to the Director of Transport and Planning to grant planning permission subject to criteria listed in the report as amended. Upon being put to the vote the recommendations as amended were carried.”

Minutes

The decision

The Panel delegated authority to grant permission subject to the report’s conditions, amendments, planning obligations and completion of a legal agreement.

“To confirm the Habitats Regulation Assessment set out in Appendix 1 of the report. 2. That authority be delegated to the Director of Transport and Planning to grant planning permission subject to the conditions in the report and any additional or amended conditions or planning obligations set out below and the completion of a S.106 Legal Agreement to secure: i.”

Minutes

Changes and conditions

The Panel amended the energy condition and added a student occupation restriction, allowing limited non-student occupation outside the academic year.

“21 – Zero or Low Carbon Energy Sources (Performance Condition) The development hereby approved shall be carried out in full accordance with the energy strategy and measures set out in the Energy Statement (January 2026, Issue No. 2). The approved measures, including zero or low carbon energy technologies, shall be installed prior to first occupation and thereafter retained and maintained as approved throughout the lifetime of the development.”

“Student Occupation Restriction (Performance) The development hereby approved shall only be occupied by a person on a course of higher education on a full-time basis at a University, Institute or other comparable educational establishment, with the exception of the period between 1 June and 31 August of any given year when the development may also be occupied by non- students.”

Minutes