Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
225 15/1623/FUL - 64 Glebe Road PDF 160 KB
Minutes:
The Committee
received an application for full planning permission.
The application
sought approval for demolition of single storey dwelling and erection of 5 new
dwellings.
The Principal Planner referred to amended conditions relating to the Highways
Authority and access. She also said that the addresses of two people who had
made representations were missing from the Officer’s report, although their
representations had been summarised in it.
The Committee received a representation in objection to the application
from a local resident.
The representation covered the following concerns about the application:
i.
Height.
ii.
Visual dominance.
iii.
Overlooking.
iv.
Challenged comments made by the Highways Authority.
v.
Distance between the proposed building and existing
neighbours.
vi.
Bin drag distances were a previous reason for
refusal. The proposed Management Plan to address concerns was unenforceable.
Refuse (collection) arrangements were still a concern for existing and proposed
residents, as was the agreement residents were expected to sign regarding bin
collection arrangements.
Mr Hanlon (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee in support of the
application.
Councillor Moore (Queen Edith Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee
about the application.
The representation covered the following issues:
i.
Referred to a 50 signature petition reflecting
local residents’ concerns.
ii.
Representations summarised in the Officer’s report
showed concern about the proximity of the application site to neighbours.
iii.
Other specific resident concerns:
a.
Bin collection arrangements.
b.
Light pollution.
c.
The proposed access would be located close to an
area of development, an accident black spot and busy cycle route; which made it
an additional risk to cyclists and children.
d.
Existing parking issues would be exacerbated. A
Local Highway Improvement Grant had already been given to the area due to
Highway Authority concerns.
The Committee:
Unanimously resolved to defer to the
application enable the impact of the development on two adjacent residential
annexes to be addressed.