Agenda item

APPLICATION NO.

23/01700/FULLS

APPLICATION TYPE

FULL APPLICATION - SOUTH

REGISTERED

07.07.2023

APPLICANT

Churchill Retirement Living

SITE

Edwina Mountbatten House, Broadwater Road, Romsey, SO51 8GH  ROMSEY TOWN

PROPOSAL

Redevelopment for retirement living accommodation comprising 47 retirement apartments including communal facilities, access, car parking and landscaping

AMENDMENTS

Amended plans received 17.07.23, 09.08.23 & 23.11.23

CASE OFFICER

Paul Goodman

The Officer’s recommendation as per the agenda and update paper was proposed by Councillor Cooper and seconded by Councillor A Dowden.  Upon being put to the vote the motion was lost.  A proposal for refusal was proposed by Councillor Gidley and seconded by Councillor Bundy.  Upon being put to the vote the motion was carried.

REFUSED for the reasons:

1.

By virtue of the scale, bulk and design of the proposal the development would be detrimental to the special architectural and historic importance of the setting of the Romsey Conservation Area and the setting of heritage assets. This harm is compounded further when the proposal is viewed from the roundabout junction of the A27 and Palmerston Street.  It is acknowledged that the development would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of these designated heritage assets and the conservation area. However, the public benefits arising from the development would not outweigh this real and identified harm. As such, the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policies E1 and E9 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan (2016).

2.

The proposed development by virtue of the size, scale, mass and proximity to dwellings on Palmerston Street will result in a sense of enclosure and overbearing impact on 38-48 Palmerston Street & 30-36 Palmerston Street to the detriment of the residential amenities of these dwellings, contrary to policy LHW4 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan (2016).

3.

In the absence of a legal agreement to secure the provision of and financial contribution towards affordable housing, the proposal is contrary to policy COM7 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan (2016) and the Infrastructure and Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document.

4.

The proposed development by means of its nature, location and scale could have likely significant effects upon the nearby Solent and Southampton Water European Designated Site which is designated for its conservation importance. In the absence of securing mitigation, the applicant has failed to satisfy the Council that the proposal would not adversely affect the special interest of the Solent and Southampton Water European Designated Site, therefore the application is contrary to Policies COM2 and E5 of the adopted Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan (2016) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended).

5.

The application site lies within close proximity to the New Forest SPA and Solent and Southampton Water SPA which are designated for their conservation importance. In the absence of a legal agreement, the application has failed to secure the required mitigation measures in accordance with the Council's adopted 'New Forest SPA Mitigation - Interim Framework' and Solent Recreation Mitigation Strategy (2017). As such, it is not possible to conclude that the development would not have an in-combination likely significant effect on the interest features of these designated sites, as a result of increased recreational pressure. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the Council's adopted 'New Forest SPA Mitigation - Interim Framework', Solent Recreation Mitigation Strategy (2017), Policy E5 of the adopted Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan 2016, and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended).

6.

In the absence of a legal agreement to secure the provision of a financial contribution towards off-site public open space provision, the proposed development fails to provide sufficient public open space required to serve the needs of the future population. The proposal would therefore result in unnecessary additional burden being placed on existing public open space provision adversely affecting the function and quality of these facilities, to the overall detriment of the area and users of the open space. The proposal is contrary to policy LHW1 of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan (2016), and the Infrastructure and Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document.

7.

In the absence of a legal agreement to secure the provision of a financial contribution towards off-site health infrastructure, the proposed development fails to provide sufficient infrastructure required to serve the needs of the future population. The proposal would therefore result in unnecessary additional burden being placed on existing public health facilities affecting the function and quality of these facilities, to the overall detriment of the area and users of the National Health Service. The proposal is contrary to policy COM15of the Test Valley Borough Revised Local Plan (2016), and the Infrastructure and Developer Contributions Supplementary Planning Document.