Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Annison and Mogford.

Councillor Williamson declared a personal interest in item 4 in his capacity as a trustee of the Preservation Trust.

Councillor Freeman declared a personal interest in item 4 in his capacity as a trustee of the Preservation Trust.

Councillor Wright declared that in relation to item 5 he had been made aware of the application by the applicant but had not taken part in any discussion on the application in advance of the meeting.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 6 September 2023 were confirmed subject to the following amendments :-

That the recommendations for application 06/22/0546/F be amended to read as follows :-

That application 06/22/0546/F be delegated to the Head of Planning to approve subject to:-

1. Prior Completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the details as set out in Appendix 5 and any amendments to the financial contributions deemed both reasonable and necessary in light further consultee comments; and,

    

2. If the Section 106 Agreement is not completed within three months of the date of this decision, to delegate authority to the Head of Planning (at their discretion) to:

    

(i) continue to progress the application to determination, where progress is being made on securing the required Section 106 Agreement; or

  (ii) refer the application back to the Development Management Committee, for re-          consideration of the application; 

(iii) to refuse the application directly, on the grounds of failing to secure planning obligations as outlined within this report (or the Committee’s decision if the recommended content is varied); and,

    3. The Conditions as set out (and any amendments to those conditions as deemed                    necessary) on pages 23 & 24 of the agenda pack.

There were no matters arising.

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which proposed two applications for consideration.

Members received a presentation from the Planning Officer which looked in detail at the proposal for the site, together with the proposed floor plans, elevations, roof plans and site plans.

Councillor Freeman asked with regard to the replacement of fabric and why the windows were not being replaced with double glazed windows, the Planning Officer reported that double glazing would be too heavy for the facilities frame and would therefore not be suitable for use.

The Architect, Faye Davis commented that toughened laminated glass would be used through the building, but advised that work was ongoing to develop these details, however there was a expectation for the glass type to meet the sustainability requirements.

Councillor Galer asked if the intention for the facility was to be an outdoor space or an indoor space, it was advised that the intention was for multiple uses which would see some seating in the restaurant, and outside but it was hoped that the facility would be used as much as it could be.

Councillor Galer further asked if a heat loss survey had been completed on the site. It was advised that this had not been included within the submitted plan. however a sustainability plan had been completed which included the heating.

Councillors were hereby invited to put questions to the Architect for the project.

Councillor Galer asked with regard to heat loss within the building and Councillor Capewell commented on the use of air source heat pumps and whether a survey has been undertaken on these. It was advised that heat calculations had been completed and the air source heat pumps had been sized to the work within the building to prevent heat loss and these would also see the temperatures regulated in both summer and winter. Faye also advised that a number of heating systems were looked into for the project but that the best solution to fulfill the sustainability expectations was being explored.

Councillor Galer asked with regard to the window framing, he was advised that the building due to its listed would be unable to have significant changes completed as there was a need to prevent the project changing the purpose for the listing of the property. Faye advised that due to building leaking in places there was a need to look at improving the air tightness of the site.

Councillor Freeman sought clarification of the multiple heat pumps that were proposed for the site. He was advised that there would be multiple levels of heat pumps such as underfloor heating and overhead heat panels, it was further advised that the heat exchange was currently being reviewed for the kitchen area.

Councillor Boyd commented on the use of the cladding as he felt that this may effect the aesthetics of the building. It was advised that there was a need to look at materials that sit within the marine environment and were robust.

Councillor Bird asked whether the rain water tanks would be retained, it was confirmed that the rain water harvesting tanks between the Wellington Pier and the Wintergardens would be retained.

Members hereby entered into debate.

Councillor Galer commented that whilst he appreciated there were pressures on to retain the character of the building, he commented that he would have been happier to have seen double glazing within the facility.

Councillor Williamson commented that there was a need to be mindful of too many changes to the character of the building on view of the project being reliant on Historic England approval, he further commented that he felt the works suggested would ensure that the building moved forward.

Application 06-23-0557-F

Following a vote, it was RESOLVED  :-

That application 06-23-0557-F for full planning permission be approved subject to the conditions as listed within the Planning Officers report.

Application 06-23-0558-LB

Following a vote, it was RESOLVED  :-

That application 06-23-0558-LB for listed building consent be approved subject to the conditions as listed within the Planning Officers report.

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which asked Members to consider a proposal for the removal of existing seafood retail kiosk and the erection of a replacement kiosk with associated bin storage enclosure.

Members received a presentation from the Planning Officer which looked in detail at the proposal for the site, together with the proposed elevations and location plans.

Councillor Bird asked with regard to the size of the new building and whether this was different to the existing structure, it was confirmed that there was very minimal size difference.

Councillor Bird further asked whether the proposed facility would have any impact on the existing grass verges in Anchor Gardens, it was confirmed that if the application were to be approved this would see the removal of some shrubs, however this would form part of a condition for these to be replaced.

Councillor Pilkington sought clarification if the application were to be approved that there would still be sufficient access to anchor gardens, this was confirmed.

Following a vote it was RESOLVED :

That application 06/23/0752/F be approved subject to the conditions as listed within the Planning Officer's report.

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which asked Members to consider a proposal for the proposed change of use of vacant land adjacent the kiosk for use as seating area for the retail kiosk, installation of glass balustrade alongside Anchor Gardens, erection of canopies over seating.

Members received a presentation from the Planning Officer which looked in detail at the proposal for the site, together with the proposed elevations and location plans.

The Planning Officer provided a verbal update to the Committee and asked the Committee to consider the removal of condition (4) as clarification has been sought by the officer as to the existing status of the area of the car park currently hatched yellow, where the proposal will provide external seating. If access is required for any operation of the car park, the seating may need to be removable at the South of the site, the Planning Officer reported that this was also to be confirmed as acceptable by the Council's Property Team. It was also requested that the committee considered rewording of condition 5 to state “planting to be provided due to their displacement as a result of..” rather than “in place of”.

Councillor Pilkington asked with regard to seating to the southern area which had been proposed and asked for confirmation on the current function of that area, it was advised that this area was not believed to be used for any operational aspect, however the Council's Property Services Team had been asked for clarification of this matter.

Following a vote it was RESOLVED :

That powers be delegated to the Head of Planning to approve application 06/23/0751/CU subject to:-

1. the conditions listed within the Planning Officer's report
2. the amendments to conditions 4 and 5 as explained in the verbal update of the officers; and
3. any further amendments to any conditions as deemed necessary

The Committee received and considered the Planning Officer's report which asked Members to consider a proposal for the installation of 4 externally illuminated vinyl fascia signs and 2 externally illuminated menu boards.

Members received a presentation from the Planning Officer which looked in detail at the proposal for the site, together with the proposed elevation plans.

Following a vote it was RESOLVED :

That application 06/23/0753-A be approved subject to the conditions as amended and listed within the Planning Officer's report.

The Chairman reported on two items of any other business as follows :-

 Dates for Committee meetings

December 18^th (Monday) has been confirmed.

Januarys meeting will be moved to January 24^th

An additional meeting will be put in for March and this will be held on the 20^th March

Aprils meeting will be moved back to the 17^th April so to avoid the Easter Holiday period.

Timings of Meetings

The Chairman advised the Committee that he would like to discuss the issues around meetings having to be completed within 2 and a half hours according tot he Constitution. Members all agreed that they would be happy to continue past this timeframe if the agenda required them to do so. 

The Monitoring Officer referred to Article 26.33 which could be used in the event of the Committee needing to continue past the allocated time of meeting.