There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 January 2023 are agreed as an accurate record.

The Chair will announce the order of Items at the beginning of the Meeting.

A Supplementary Agenda with any modifications will be published on the day of the meeting.

Note: there is no written report for this item

The Committee noted the amendments and modifications to the officer’s report. The Chair advised that the agenda would be taken in the published agenda order.

Please note that members of the public, including the applicant or anyone speaking on their behalf, are expressing their own opinions and the Council does not take any responsibility for the accuracy of statements made by them.

Application No: 22/P2258

Ward: Ravensbury

Recommendation: ??GRANT Planning permission subject to conditions? 

The Planning Officer presented the report.

The Committee received presentations from two objectors who stated:

·       If the Transport Officer did not check and verify the parking survey data prepared by Alpha Parking Limited then they would request that the application be postponed until this was authenticated by the Head of Planning.

·       The case officers have recommended approval of the application due to external targets for new housing but there was a greater demand for large family homes.

·       The overdevelopment would have a sever detrimental effect on amenities which has led to 41 households that have objected to the proposal.

·       Six flats would result in overlooking from two living rooms, additional parking required for 14 cars, additional heat pumps, additional noise and disturbance as well as a 300% increase in traffic and pedestrian movement.

·       Room sizes barely met the internal space standards and would offer poor quality accommodation.

·       The case officer did not provide a nonbiased report nor provide credible evidence.

·       The development would be out of character of and contrary to the National Planning Framework, paragraph 124.

·       As the flats were small, communal areas would be more intensely inhabited.

·       There was no planning condition to restrict the number of residents to 14.

·       The various parking surveys were inaccurate and did not reflect the actual circumstances.

·       With 14 people entertaining on the other side of the boundary fence, 1A Ravensbury Avenue would experience a greater impact to amenities as the boundary fence would be less than one meter away. There would also be six heat pumps within a meter of their child’s bedroom.

·       The proposed three general refuse wheely bins would be too large for Veolia to collect and inadequate for the number of residents. This could lead to pavement hazards and overflowing bins.

·       The developer misrepresented himself and did not display the required planning notice on the site boundary as required in law.

The committee received presentations from Ward Councillor Caroline Charles and Councillor Peter McCabe who raised points including:

·       Agreed with the original application for two family homes but not with the new application.

·       There would be no social housing.

·       There are only three of each type of refuse bin which was of concern.

·       Concerned that the bicycle hanger would only fit three bikes.

·       As some heat pumps would be sited behind the bicycle hanger, it would make access difficult to access for repairs.

·       Although the wildflower meadow sounded great, the garden would not be big enough for it.

·       The application stated that if there was too much water usage, measures such as water efficient low flow showers could happen which may result in not enough water for residents.

·       Despite the planning officer’s recommendation to approve, 41 residents have said this application would have a detrimental impact.

·       Overlooking from the first floor, loss of amenities and out of character were of concern.

·       If this application were approved, it could lead to additional applications of the same nature in the future.

The committee received presentations from the representative of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Officer Recommendation:

That Members note the contents of the report.

The report was noted.

Officer Recommendation:

That Members note the contents of the report.

The report was noted.