Two affordable homes at 2A Ruskin Road, Southsea

What is proposed

The application would convert an office into two one-bedroom homes, with extensions, a pitched roof, renewable energy equipment, gardens and two parking spaces.

“The proposal seeks permission for external alterations and extensions, and change of use of the property from an office serving the Housing Association, to two affordable one- bedroom dwellings for elderly people.”

“The external alterations include a single storey front (west) extension (protruding 2.5 metres forward of the existing building, 5.2m wide, 3.2m high), single storey side (north) extension (6.5m deep, 4.3m wide, and 3.2m high), roof alterations including raising the ridge height (from 5.2m to 6.6m) and creating a gable end, installation of two Air Source Heat Pumps, and solar panels, as well as landscaping to the front of the property.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is an office behind terraced properties on a quiet residential road, near public transport, shops, services and other facilities.

“The application site lies between Fratton and Milton located on a quiet residential road off the main route of Goldsmith Avenue, and nestled behind a row of terraced properties fronting Ruskin Road and Goldsmith Avenue, and the properties fronting Apsley Road. It consists of an office (Use Class E) serving a Housing Association. Access is gained from the end of the terrace on the east side of Ruskin Road, alongside no.”

“The application site is in close proximity to transport links; 900m to Fratton station and 90m to Shepherds Crook bus stop on Goldsmith Avenue served by three different bus lines. The site is 500m from the Pompey Centre offering various amenities and employment opportunities, and 170m from Portsmouth Football Club. There is a Tesco Express shop 55m away on Goldsmith Avenue. The site is located 200m from Milton Park, and 735m from Milton Centre.”

Officer report

Planning history

An earlier application for an office and storage building after demolition was granted in 1997.

“A*24986/AB CONSTRUCTION OF TWO STOREY/SINGLE STOREY BUILDING FOR USE AS OFFICES/ STORAGE AFTER DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDING, 2.5M HIGH, FENCE/GATES/ WALL TO BOUNDARIES (MAXIMUM) - Granted 03.02.1997”

Officer report

What consultees said

Highways, contaminated land, regulatory services, the neighbourhood forum and the arboricultural officer raised no objections, subject to safeguards and details.

“No objection. We support the principle of delivering additional social housing for the over 55s, which aligns with the Neighbourhood Plan’s objectives for inclusive, mixed communities. However, certain matters require clarification or amendment before the Forum could fully support the application, including SPA mitigation measures, inclusion of swift boxes alongside bee bricks and bat boxes, details of soft landscaping and SUDS.”

“Arboricultural Officer No objection. A suitably worded condition is recommended to ensure all works are carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural Impact Assessment.”

Officer report

What residents said

Four addresses objected, citing trees, construction disruption, demolition, loss of privacy and light, overshadowing, overdevelopment and sewage flooding.

“Representations from four addresses have been received in respect of the proposals. All object to the scheme.”

“Impact on the neighbouring trees not taken into account, lack of tree survey; • Construction Management Plan requested to manage the disruption, some neighbouring residents are vulnerable or homebound and the disruption would be greater for them; • Unjustified demolition of a building contradicts the Council's sustainability policy, no Whole Life Carbon Assessment or Sustainability Statement provided; • Loss of amenity due to loss of privacy, loss of light, overshadowing,…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The Development Management Lead introduced the application, and no deputations were made.

Members’ discussion

Members welcomed the swift bricks, planted gardens, reduced paving and expected biodiversity improvement, while officers clarified light and space standards.

“Members' Questions In response to questions, officers provided the following information as clarification: • Internal layouts met national space standards and daylight provision was secured through windows, two rooflights and a sun tunnel which should provide 80-90% of the light due to its reflective surface. These were highlighted to the committee on the plans. Officers confirmed the accommodation was acceptable in design and amenity terms.”

“Members' Comments Members welcomed the scheme, particularly the inclusion of swift bricks in line with the emerging City Plan. It was noted that the scheme involved a considerable amount of de-paving and the plans showed the introduction of planted gardens and a hedge strip. It was highlighted that this would reduce the extent of the existing impermeable concrete surface, which was welcomed.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee resolved to grant delegated conditional permission subject to SPA mitigation, with authority to amend conditions and refuse if an agreement was not reached.

“RESOLVED that (1) Delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth to grant conditional permission subject to a s111 agreement to secure: (a) SPA mitigation. (2) Delegated authority be granted to the Assistant Director of Planning & Economic Growth to add/amend conditions where necessary.”

Minutes