Agenda item

PROPOSAL: Erection of a 4 storey residential building comprising four flats (3 x 3 bed and 1 x 2 bed) with associated car parking spaces, cycle storage, refuse storage, amenity space, provision of a drying area and landscaping (new block to be built at north-west drying area of the Frontenac Estate).

RECOMMENDATION: That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission and that the Head of Planning be granted delegated authority to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives to secure the matters set out within the report.

Ms. Michele Katzler (Planning Officer) introduced the proposal and answered members’ questions.  She referenced the supplementary report in responding to members’ queries on the applicant’s consultation.  She updated members that two consultation events were held prior to the formal planning application to inform residents of the amendments to the scheme made after the first consultation event. As a result of resident feedback from both consultations changes were made prior to submission of the application which included proposed affordable flats, enhanced landscaping, altered car park layout, retained access to garages, new drying area for existing residents, re-surfaced access roads and walkways.  Members heard that a revised landscape plan had been submitted with additional detail.  Ms Katzler drew members’ attention to revised drawing plans to amend condition 2 and an amended condition 3 for residential amenity space areas as set out within the supplementary report.

Mr James Coffey (objector) referred to a 60 signature petition submitted by the residents in objection to the proposal. Although he welcomed the principle of development, he expressed a view that site was inappropriate as it would give rose to traffic congestion which he considered was already an issue on the estate. He added that the site was in use as a drying area by the residents. Mr Coffey also expressed reservations on emergency access and safety of residents.

Ms Kerry Radford (applicant’s agent) reiterated the applicant’s consultation and the residents’ feedback which had been incorporated into the scheme.  She continued that the daylight and sunlight report concluded that there would be no unacceptable impact from the relatively low height development.  Ms Radford outlined the parking improvements including 5 additional car parking spaces including 2 for disable parking and the erection of bollards to discourage the existing unauthorised parking in the area.

In responding to issues raised, Ms Katzler stated that the development would be parking neutral and clarified that issues about unauthorised parking that already was taking place were not within the remit of the Planning Committee.  She added that the proposal had been fully examined by the Council’s Highways Team and found to be acceptable.  It was highlighted that the proposal would improve access for emergency vehicles, including fire appliances.

DECISION: Granted planning permission as recommended subject to the conditions set out within the committee report, with amendment to condition 2 to reflect the revised drawing numbers, condition 3 adjusted to require works to be completed prior to occupation as set out within the supplementary report.

(Voting on the recommendation for approval as amended was unanimous).