Agenda item

The application before Members was for the erection of four one bedroom flats on land adjacent to 67 Corbets Tey Road. The application site had an extensive planning history with planning applications previously submitted, and refused, for five and six units respectively. 

Members noted that the application had been called in by Councillor Linda Van Den Hende on the grounds that that whilst the proposal was a smaller application to that previously refused, there were still significant difficulties with the site.  It was considered that the proposals represented an over-development of the plot and the design was unacceptable in terms of scale and bulk. In addition to this was the issue of parking. As part of the plans for the development, two spaces assigned to the existing development on-site would be re-assigned thereby reducing the visitor parking bay provision. Concerns were furthermore raised in respect of construction traffic and how vehicles would access the site in view that the access into the site was single lane.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector with a response by the applicant.

The objector commented that residents of Bellmakers Mews had concerns regarding access and egress as the site was quite compact and had a very narrow entrance. The objector also commented that existing residents were concerned how the build of the proposal would impact on their amenity.

The applicant responded by commenting that he had worked closely with planning officers, following the previous refusals of planning permission, to design a scheme that reduced the mass and bulk of the proposed development. The applicant also commented that the parking provision for the development would be the current visitor spaces on the adjacent development.

With its agreement Councillor Linda Van den Hende addressed the Committee.

Councillor Van den Hende commented that the application was for an infill site that should have been developed at the same time as the adjacent building. Councillor Van den Hende also commented that the parking for the site was below the Council’s policy level and was also reducing the visitor parking provision that had been afforded to the adjacent development. Councillor Van den Hende concluded by commenting that the access road was too narrow for increased traffic, during the first build commercial vehicles had accessed the site from an entrance adjacent to the nearby school which had subsequently been closed following completion of the initial development and therefore all traffic would now been entering/exiting the site through the narrow entrance.

During the debate Members sought and received clarification of the distance between the existing development and the proposed development.

Members also questioned the legitimacy of taking parking provision from the existing development and including it in the proposed development.

Discussions around the possible overdevelopment of the site and effect on existing resident’s amenity were also had.

Members also discussed possible safety measures that could be introduced along the narrow access road.

The report recommended that planning permission be granted however following a motion to refuse the granting of planning permission which was carried by 6 votes to 5 it was RESOLVED that planning permission be refused on the grounds:

·         Cramped overdevelopment by reason of footprint, proximity to boundaries, lack of amenity, effect on existing residents living conditions harmful to amenity.

·         Failure to secure a legal agreement for parking permits.

·         Failure to secure a legal agreement for a contribution to school places.

The vote for the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission was carried by 6 votes to 5.

Councillors Donald, Hawthorn, Nunn, Whitney, Martin and Williamson voted for the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.

Councillors Misir, Kelly, Best, Wallace and White voted against the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.