Agenda item

PLANNING APPLICATION B 16 0205

To answer any written questions received from members of the public no later than 5 p.m. two clear working days prior to the meeting.

Minutes:

Proposal:         Erection of 9 Houses

Site:                  Land off Robin Hoods Walk  Boston

Applicant:        Taylor Made Services

 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and advised update information received following issue of the agenda. 

 

A further seven letters of objection had been received and the petition originally submitted had been extended from 130 signatures to 170 signatures.  

 

Committee were advised that the majority of the additional objections cited reasons already tabled, however new concerns noted that in line with the 173 houses being built in the nearby area the 9 proposed on the site would add to pedestrian and vehicle congestion.  The Guest House was concerned that access to their property could be blocked alleged that the site notice when issued had been placed in a location where residents could not see it. 

Furthermore the objectors had concerns in respect of the 12 year rule of the land ownership.  A request was made that the committee delay any decision making to allow the neighbours to consider the new information.

Confirmation was given that the submission of additional material in objection to the application had been distributed to all members of the committee in advance of the meeting.

 

Committee received representation in objection to the application which included:

 

The objector questioned the Committee’s consideration is respect of the definition of significant harm.  Highway safety and increased congestion and lack of parking were a major concern and would cause significant harm together with the residents concerns about overlooking; loss of light and amenity including a loss of green open space, together with serious concerns about damage to existing property boundaries and the risk of subsidence due to inadequate sewers and drainage. 

It was the opinion of the objectors that it was back-land development and a request for an official site visit was made.  Committee were referred to point 7.12 of the report which the objectors contested, with their opinion being that the impact would actually be extremely substantial on neighbouring residents. 

Referring to the existing traffic and footfall along Robin Hoods Walk committee were asked to note the volume of vehicles the Haven High School created; the existing residential homes and the Fire Station which could potentially also home an ambulance station. 

Noting that the Cemetery and Crematorium were also served by the road, the addition of a possible 18 vehicles accessing and exiting the site would cause serious problems both for pedestrians and drivers.

 

 

 

Further concerns included the lack of any traffic survey having been undertaken in such a busy area.

Committee were advised that there was no safe place across the frontage to put the rubbish bins on collection day and therefore it would impede pedestrians, including school children and result in them having to move off the pavements and onto the road.  

Committee were also asked to note the objection by Haven High School and to take seriously the concerns for the safety of the pupils.

Finally, the objectors voiced their disappointment and anger on behalf of all the residents involved at the lack of any support by either of the ward members. Despite numerous attempts to contact them with several phone calls made to both of the ward members / messages left and emails sent, neither ward member had responded to the residents call for help or attended the public meeting.  The final comment made was that building bungalows would be an option to address many of the concerns raised and asked the planning officer and applicant to consider that suggestion.

 

Committee received representation from the Ward Member which included:

 

Agreeing the comments of the objectors and referencing the issues and dangers they had identified including noise, light problems with a loss of light and the bin collections, the Ward Member sought a common sense approach in order to avoid a future slum and reiterated the suggestion of building bungalows.  Finally noting concern at actual location of the site they asked the committee to refuse the application in line with the serious objections raised including the residents loss of amenity and the dangers of additional vehicle and pedestrian congestion.

 

In response to the representation the Senior Planning Officer drew committee’s attention to the fact that the site already had existing vehicle traffic with the 26 garages already on it.  Lincolnshire County Council Highways had taken that fact into consideration together with the fact that the proposed access within the application site was already established and already in use:  they had noted that there was the possibility for all the garages to be in use with 26 vehicles exiting and entering the site on a daily basis.

 

It was moved by Councillor Jonathan Noble and seconded by Councillor Brian Rush that the application be refused against officers recommendation on the grounds it was contrary to Policy G1 due to the loss of amenity to residents; Policy H3 due to possible adverse traffic conditions which would arise and Policy H2.4 in respect of the site being back-land development.   The final policy identified was G6 relating to vehicle access.

 

The Development Control Manager provided a point of information to members in that the use of Policy H2.4 on a previous planning application had been identified by a Planning Inspector as not being NPPF compliant.

 

The Head of Built Environment and Development urged caution bymembers if using highway reasons for refusal:  there had been no objection from Lincolnshire County Council Highways who were a statutory consultee and as such it would be hard to uphold any refusal on those grounds.

 

 

VOTE:      In Favour    7.        Against   2.        Abstention 1.

 

RESOLVED:   a. That the petition be received and it be taken into  

                            account in the consideration; and

 

b. That the application be refused contrary to officer  

     recommendation for the following reasons:

 

  1. The proposed development, by reason of the site's and narrow irregular shape and proximity to large numbers of existing curtilages would constitute overdevelopment particularly on the present undeveloped land causing harm to the character and appearance of the immediate area where existing residents would not reasonably expect to see development in this location contrary to Adopted Plan Policies G1, H2 and H3.

 

  1. The layout of the dwellings at the rear and the access road into the site will have, by virtue of noise, disturbance, visual intrusion and loss of privacy through overlooking, an adverse impact on the amenity, living conditions and quality of life currently enjoyed by the occupiers of nearby dwellings. The proposal is therefore contrary to Adopted Plan Policy G1.

 

  1. The entrance to the site is located only 30m from the traffic light controlled junction between Robin Hoods Walk and Norfolk Street and is in an area that is already heavily congested. The layout of the proposal and the narrow width of the private access road does not allow for a dedicated bin collection area at the site's entrance resulting in refuse bins for the dwellings on collection days being dispersed over the pavement. In the absence of proposals for the management and maintenance of the private road the Local Planning Authority considers that congestion and obstruction could occur on the access road to the detriment of the free passage of emergency vehicles. The proposal is therefore contrary to Adopted Plan Policies G1, G6, H2 and H3.

 

  1. The highway at the site's entrance has double yellow lines and the site is also close to the Haven High Academy School and Boston Fire Station whom regularly seeks quick access to this busy junction for emergency purposes. The combination of these factors will put further pressures on an already heavily congested road network to a degree that will adversely impact highway safety and may increase the risk of accidents to school children and other pedestrians. The proposal is therefore contrary to Adopted Plan Policies G1, G6, H2 and H3.

 

Committee adjourned for a five minute comfort break at this point in the proceedings.

 

It is recorded that Councillors Colin Brotherton and Yvonne Stevens returned to the committee at this point and participated in all subsequent business on the agenda.