Issue - meetings

Demolition of existing building and erection of a five storey building containing seventeen residential units (four one bedroom flats, six two bedroom flats, five three bedroom flats and two four bedroom flats) and one disabled parking space, together with associated outdoor amenity space and landscaping.

10.1  The Planning Officer introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.  He referred to the addendum which stated that there had been one post submission revision, with the inclusion of opaque glazed screens to the sides of the balconies on the south-west elevation.

10.2  He also informed Members that the drawings on the front page of the report referred to a drawing D03 rev. A.  The correct drawing was in fact D03 rev. B, which was included in Members’ A3 sized print outs.  Drawing D03 rev. A showed opaque glazing to habitable room windows on the south-west elevation of the proposed development; on drawing D03 rev. B, these windows revert to clear glazing.  In the event that planning permission was granted, the decision notice would refer to D03 rev. B and not D03 rev. A.

10.3  The Planning Officer also stated that an additional condition would be added for the scheme to be a car free development, within the Section 106 agreement.  This was AGREED.

10.4  Angela Brady spoke in objection to the scheme, her comments are summarised as follows:-

§  The proposed development is out of character with the surrounding area and also too bulky.

§  Fails to integrate with the existing streetscene.

§  It is one floor too high and 22% of the units are single aspect and face the car park.

§  It was previously agreed under a Section 106 agreement that the communal amenity space would remain, which had now been dropped from the current application.

§  Issue of overlooking.

§  Feels that the application is invalid as the site notice was not placed outside the site.

§  Pleased that the scheme is now be car free.

§  Feels that the number of units should be reduced to 10, with dual aspect.

10.5  Ben Thomas (Savills), Andy Heath (BBTW Architects) and Same Ohene (Genesis Housing Group) spoke in support of the scheme, their comments are summarised as follows:-

§  They had been involved in numorous pre-application meetings with the planning service within the last 4 years, during which time they had responded to a number of concerns.

§  The scheme had also been considered by the Design Panel and it had benefited from the suggestions made.

§  Providing 100% affordable housing.

§  The scheme will include a brown roof and rain water harvesting.

§  Reduced carbon emissions by 80%.

§  Car free development.

§  There had previously been no interest in the communal amenity space, which was now not included within the application.

§  The amount of amenity space provided with balconies and private gardens is deemed acceptable.

§  The issue of density was not a stand alone consideration.

§  Meets the need for affordable housing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10