Agenda item

1.  V/2020/0553, Muse Developments, Application made in accordance with the Town and Country planning (Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations) 2017: An outline planning application with all matters reserved (except for means of access to the residential part of the site) for a mixed-use residential and commercial development, Former Rolls Royce Site, Off Watnall Road, Hucknall.

In accordance with the Council’s Policy for dealing with late matters in relation to planning applications, (Minute No. D4.17, 1993/94 refers), officers proceeded to give a verbal report as to additional comments received in relation to the application as follows:-

A further condition had been proposed which had been agreed by the applicant to restrict the future commercial uses on the site, so that they did not become town centre uses. The wording to some of the other conditions had also been amended. These did not change the meaning of any of the conditions.

Condition 4 in respect of the quantum of development was to be removed, as it would be included within the Section 106 Agreement.

A further resident comment had also been received, which raised concerns regarding increased traffic on Watnall Road. The matter was already discussed within the officer report.

Richard Irving, on behalf of the Applicant, took the opportunity to address the Committee in respect of this matter.  As per the agreed process, Members were then offered the opportunity to clarify any points raised during the submission as required.

It was moved and seconded that conditional consent be granted as per officer’s recommendation.

2.  V/2021/0639, Castle Rock Projects Ltd., Change of Use From 2 x C3 Dwellings into 1 x Sui-Generis 10 Bedroom HMO Including Erection of Single Storey Extension to Rear, 2 Albert Street, Hucknall.

(In accordance with the Council’s Constitution and the Members’ Code of Conduct, Councillor John Wilmott had previously declared a Non-Registrable interest in respect of this application. His interest was such that he stayed in the meeting and took part in the discussion and voting thereon.)

Stephen Cherry, an Objector, David Peck, on behalf of the Applicant, and Councillor John Wilmott, as Ward Member, took the opportunity to address the Committee in respect of this matter. As per the agreed process, Members were then offered the opportunity to clarify any points raised during the submissions as required.

It was moved by Councillor Jason Zadrozny and seconded by Councillor Arnie Hankin that the officer’s recommendation contained within the report be rejected and planning consent be refused.

Reasons for rejecting officers’ recommendation:

1.    The proposed use of the building to form a 10-bedroom, 10-person house in multiple occupation is considered by the Council to result in the loss of two family homes in a primary residential area. The use of all three floors for independently used habitable rooms results in the overlooking of neighbouring properties, this together with an increase in noise and disturbance due to the intensification of the use and increase in comings and goings from the property will have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring residents. It is thus considered to be contrary to policies ST1 and HG8 of the Ashfield Local Plan Review.

2.    The proposal fails to provide adequate off-street parking provision in an area where on street parking is significantly restricted. The intensification of the use will result in further demands on the limited parking that is available on street and will result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety. It is therefore considered to be contrary to policies ST1 and HG8 of the Ashfield Local Plan Review.

For the motion:

Councillors Arnie Hankin, Rachel Madden, Andy Meakin, Phil Rostance, Daniel Williamson, John Wilmott and Jason Zadrozny.

Against the motion:

None.

Abstentions:

None.