Issue - meetings

With reference to the tabled supplementary, the Area Planning Manager, Rachel McConnell addressed the following issues raised by objectors:

i) Parking

The use of double yellow lines in some sections to control parking in Oman Avenue, the availability of at least one off-street parking bay for every house and the existence of on-street parking bays by Oman Court meant that over-spill parking in Oman Avenue could be reasonably accommodated on-street.

(ii)  Servicing and Bin storage

The existing ad-hoc arrangements would be formalised whilst removing and landscaping the existing unused bin store thus making them proportionate to the requirements of the application for four flats.  Whilst condition 8 requiring further details of bin stores had been amended to include reference to Household Waste Collection Strategy, full compliance could not be imposed retrospectively on the existing 23 flats.  She reported that the Streetcare department had confirmed that they would require two sets of keys to the gates to ensure access to the site by the Council's recycling and refuse crews. In order to reflect that, a new informative and an amendment was suggested to condition 11 (further details of gates).

iii) Visual impact

The chimneys would be extended and thus their utility and their visual impact would be maintained.  It would be the responsibility of the freeholder of the building to agree with the existing and future residents if the chimneys were to be operational.

Rachel McConnell continued that other issues raised by objectors in respect of the structural integrity of the building, flooding/drainage and the re-surfacing of the entire car park area had been addressed in the main report, although they were not matters which could be considered when determining a planning application.

Mr Dominic Connelly objected to the proposed development on the following grounds;

(i)         Inadequate provision for parking in an already heavily parked street.

(ii)        Overlooking and loss of privacy.

(iii)       The symmetrical character of the building would be affected.

(iv)       An additional further storey to be added to the existing building would pose an increased risk to its structure.

(v)        Loss of vegetation.

Mr Robert Dunwell objected to the proposed development on the grounds that it failed to address to address the requirements of the Council’s Household Waste Strategy which he submitted was adopted by Executive for implementation on 15 November 2010.  In his view, the application did not meet the requirements on floor space, internal and external storage.  Mr Dunwell therefore urged members to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6