Two-storey two-bedroom dwelling at 33 Ripstone Gardens, Southampton

The site and surroundings

The site was part of the rear garden of a semi-detached corner house, near local centres, the university and schools, with restricted parking nearby.

“The application site comprises a section of the existing rear garden of 33 Ripstone Gardens. The host property is a 2 storey semi-detached dwelling on a corner plot at the junction of Ripstone Gardens and Merton Road. The rear garden boundary abuts the footpath of Merton Road with an adjacent dropped kerb. No.33 Ripstone Gardens retains an existing off-road parking space to the front of the dwelling.”

“The property lies in close proximity to the University of Southampton, Burgess Road and Portswood Road Local Centres, and within walking distance of local primary and secondary schools. The site lies within a ‘medium accessibility’ area for public transport with Monday to Friday 2hr / permit holder parking restrictions along the majority of surrounding roads with small sections of unrestricted parking on each road.”

Officer report

Planning history

There were no previous planning applications for the site.

“There are no previous planning applications for the application site.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the housing, design, amenity, parking and habitat impacts acceptable with mitigation and conditions, and recommended approval.

“The key issues for consideration in the determination of this planning application are: - The principle of development - Design and effect on character - Residential amenity - Parking highways and transport - Likely effect on designated habitats - Biodiversity Net Gain…”

“The principle of additional housing is supported. The site is not allocated for additional housing, but the proposed dwelling would represent windfall housing development. The LDF Core Strategy identifies the Council’s current housing need, and this scheme would assist the Council in meeting its targets. As detailed in Policy CS4 an additional 16,300 homes need to be provided within the City between 2006 and 2026.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Consultees generally raised no objections, while Natural England objected to recreational impacts on protected sites and ecology identified a biodiversity loss requiring off-site credits.

“Natural England Objection - Recreational impacts on the New Forest SAC, SPA and Ramsar. As submitted, we consider it will have an adverse effect on the integrity of the New Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar site from increased recreational disturbance. The impacts are also likely to affect the features of the associated Sites of Special Scientific Interest.”

“Recreational impacts Solent Special Protected Areas (SPAs) – No objection. Ecology No objection. The biodiversity net gain metric and report indicate a net loss of biodiversity of 38.76% with no scope to create replacement habitat on site, therefore, off-site credits will need to be purchased. The applicant must make efforts to purchase credits from a local provider before looking further afield.”

Officer report

What residents said

Residents and a ward councillor objected over cramped and out-of-character development, garden and biodiversity loss, parking, traffic, privacy, overshadowing and local pressure.

“The new house is unnecessary and would result in a cramped development, eroding the spatial character and resulting in loss of established garden that contributes to local biodiversity. HRA is not aware of an acute shortage of housing in Highfield.”

“Two parking spaces are needed for the new build and no new Parking Permits are issued. The Parking Technical Note concludes there is sufficient capacity. Parking is a serious concern especially during university term time and this would exacerbate parking issues. The space for a cycle shed and bin storage would be very cramped.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A local resident addressed the meeting, and statements from the resident and a ward councillor were circulated and considered.

The vote

The Panel confirmed the Habitats Regulation Assessment and unanimously carried the recommendation for conditional approval.

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

“The Panel then considered the officer’s recommendation that the application be conditionally approved subject to criteria listed in the report and recommendation. Upon being put to the vote the recommendation was unanimously carried.”

Minutes