Six flats and commercial unit at 63 - 65 Albert Road, Southsea

What was proposed

The application proposed a commercial ground floor, six flats above, two additional storeys, and bin and cycle storage.

“The proposed extension would be built above the majority of the main body of the building, with the third storey set back with a mansard roof, including picture dormer windows. The second-floor element would be finished in a matching brickwork to the existing, with the third finished in red plain tile. A gap would be left adjacent to the frontage of no.61 Albert Road where the roof space would remain unchanged and an element of green wall proposed to the frontage.”

“The proposal would retain a single commercial unit over the majority of the ground floor, with a dual access from the rear alley accessed via Chelsea Road. A section of the ground floor would be taken over by the new residential flats to provide a courtyard entrance from Chelsea Road, bin and cycle storage and the entrance hall and stair for the flats. The scheme would then provide two flats on each upper floor (4 two-bedroom units and 2 one-bedroom units).”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The corner building sits in a district centre beside the Campbell Road Conservation Area and locally listed terraces, with commercial uses along Albert Road.

“The surrounding area is almost entirely commercial at ground level. There is a strong mix of business uses, with the overwhelming character of the area at ground floor level being within Class E and sui generis drinking establishments and takeaways. Many of the commercial units have residential flats above. Development has a range of ages, scales and heights up to 5-storeys along Albert Road.”

“The site does not fall within a conservation area but is adjacent to the Campbell Road conservation area which terminates at 1 Chelsea Road, it is noted that the terrace at no's 1 - 13 Chelsea Road are also locally listed.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended conditional approval because the scheme would provide homes and retain commercial use, with impacts on heritage, amenity, flood risk and highways considered acceptable.

“As the scheme has acceptable impacts on heritage assets, flood risk and habitats sites, the application of policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance do not provide a strong reason for refusal of the application. The tilted balance is therefore engaged and there is a presumption in favour of approval of the development, particularly bearing in mind its sustainable location and the efficient use of the site.”

“The principle of development is accepted as the proposal would contribute additional residential units and retain commercial use in a local centre which would support the objectives of the development plan. In addition, the standard of accommodation is good in respect to room sizes, and waste storage provision, would be having regard to the public benefits of the flats being provide is considered acceptable in design terms.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, waste and contaminated-land officers raised no objections subject to conditions, while environmental health requested noise controls and conservation officers assessed moderate heritage impact.

“Given the location of the premises of the building, size increase and proximity to residential properties, Regulatory Services believe that certain conditions will be required to assist in controlling any adverse noise outbreak from the commercial premises that may have the potential to adversely affect the proposed residential dwellings above.”

“The level of impact on the setting of these assets is considered in the case of the Conservation Area to be moderate, and in the case of the terrace, given the proposal's siting, and the increase in mass, scale and height it would generate in close proximity to the terrace the proposals impact is assessed as moderate.”

Officer report

What residents said

Twelve representations opposed the scheme, citing light, privacy, parking, design, flood risk, asbestos, construction disruption and overdevelopment.

“Loss of light to the adjoining flats across Chelsea Road; • Overlooking and a loss of privacy to the adjoining flats across Chelsea Road; • No daylight/sunlight assessment has been provided with the application; • Lack of parking and increased demand from the proposal; • Loss of light to neighbours to north; • Impact from asbestos in the existing building; • Design out of character with Chelsea Road Conservation Area; • Impact from deliveries on Chelsea Road; • Loss of…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Head of Development Management introduced the application, and the agent spoke in favour on behalf of the applicant.

What members discussed

Members discussed overshadowing, parking, commercial activity, window design, building height, heritage and whether there was a planning reason to refuse.

“Members' Questions In response to questions, officers provided the following information as clarification: • The expectation was that the windows would be double-glazed for insulation. Original metal Crittall windows were only likely to be retained if the building was listed. Crittall windows were a well-considered way of dealing with this particular property. Modern technology and materials meant they could be thermally efficient.”

“Members' Comments In discussion, members made the following comments: • The Design & Access Statement suggested more overshadowing than on the presentation slide. • There may be problems with people hanging around outside, depending on what the ground floor was used for, but members recognised that was a matter beyond the committee's scope. • If there was going to densification of urban areas the proposal was the way to go. The building could be taller as it was on a corner.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee resolved to grant delegated conditional permission, subject to mitigation, amended obscure glazing and an additional condition for commercial amenity facilities.

“RESOLVED 1. That delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth to Grant Conditional Permission subject to satisfactory agreement of an internal local authority approval mechanism (an equivalent legal agreement) to secure: (a) SPA mitigation, nitrates and bird disturbance. That delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth to add/amend conditions where necessary. 3.”

Minutes