3

Application No:

Date Registered:

Applicant:

Agent

Development:

Location:

Ward:

Grid Reference:

File Reference:

Site History:

Development Plan:

Contrary to Development Plan:

Consultations:

Representations:

Newspaper Advertisement:

S107/01113/FUL

26th June 2007

John Ure 33 Croftpark Street Bellshill ML4 1EY

Bracewell Stirling Architects 4 Woodside Place Glasgow G3 7QF

Erection of Residential Development Comprising 4 Flatted & 2 semidetached Dwellings

Land At 33 Croftpark Street Bellshill ML4 IEY

14 Bellshill: Councillors Curran, Lyle and McGuigan

273280 661 009

SIPLIBI7I93IAMIGF

None relevant

Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) HSG8 'Established Housing Areas'

No

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (no objection) Scottish Water (conditions) Scottish Power (no objection) British Gas (no objection)

34 letters of representation received plus petition with 47 signatures

Not Required

116

117

Recommendation: Approve Subject to the Following Conditions:.

1. That the development hereby permitted shall be started within five years of the date of this permission.

Reason: To accord with the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997.

That, except as may otherwise be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority, the development shall be implemented in accordance with drawing numbers:- 3388/207 Rev C 33881206 Rev C 3388/201 Rev C 33881202 Rev C 3388/203 Rev D 3388/204 Rev D 3388/205 Rev D 3388/208 Rev D

2.

Reason: To clarify the drawings on which this approval of permission is founded.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the facing materials to be used on all external walls and roofs shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and the development shall be implemented in accordance with the details approved under the terms of this condition.

3.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

That BEFORE the development herby permitted starts, a detailed drawing showing the location of all bin stores for the flatted development within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority and before any flat hereby permitted is occupied the bin stores shall be completed in accordance with the approved plans.

4.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

5. That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a scheme of landscaping shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include:-

(a) details of any earth moulding and hard landscaping, boundary treatment, grass seeding and turfing;

(b) a scheme of tree and shrub planting, incorporating details of the location, number, variety and size of trees and shrubs to be planted;

(c) a detailed timetable for all landscaping works which shall provide for these works being carried out contemporaneously with the development of the site.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

6. That all works included in the scheme of landscaping and planting, approved under the terms of condition 5 above, shall be completed in accordance with the approved timetable and before the last flat or dwellinghouse within the development has been completed, and any trees, shrubs, or areas of grass which die, are removed, damaged, or become diseased, within two years of the occupation of the last flat or dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted, shall be replaced within the following year with others of a similar size and species.

Reason: To ensure the implementation of the landscaping scheme in the interests of amenity.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, a management and maintenance 7.

118

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

scheme shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority, and it shall include proposals for the continuing care, maintenance and protection of the proposed footpaths, parking areas, external lighting, landscaped areas and fences within the development site.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail,

That BEFORE last flat or dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted has been completed, the management and maintenance scheme approved under the terms of condition 7 shall be in operation.

Reason: To ensure ongoing maintenance in the interests of traffic safety and amenity.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, full details of the design and location Of all fences and walls to be erected on the site shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

That BEFORE any of the flats or dwellinghouses hereby permitted, situated on a site upon which a fence or wall is to be erected, are occupied, the fence, or wall, as approved under the terms of condition 9 above, shall be erected.

Reason: To enable the Planning Authority to consider these aspects in detail.

That, notwithstanding condition 10 above, BEFORE any of the flats or dwellings hereby permitted are occupied, a 1.8 metre high screen fence shall be upgraded or erected, as appropriate, along the boundary marked BLUE on the approved plans.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of the area.

That before any flat within the development hereby permitted is occupied, the parking and manoeuvring areas shown on the approved plans, shall be levelled, properly drained, surfaced in a material which the Planning Authority has approved in writing before the start of surfacing work and dearly marked out, and shall, thereafter, be maintained as parking and manoeuvring areas.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access facilities to the dwellings.

That before any of the flatted or semi-detached dwellings within the development hereby permitted are occupied everything exceedingl.05 metres in height above road channel level shall be removed from the areas shaded blue and, thereafter, nothing exceeding 1.05 metres in height above the road channel level shall be planted, placed, erected, or allowed to grow, within the area shaded blue.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

That before any flat within the development hereby permitted is occupied the new vehicular access to the parking court shall be formed with a 5.5 metre wide dropped kerb footway crossover.

Reason: In the interests of traffic and pedestrian safety.

That before each semi-detached dwellinghouse within the development hereby permitted is occupied two parking spaces, either 3 metres wide by 10 metres long or 5 metres wide by 6 metres long, shall be provided for that semi-detached dwellinghouse.

Reason: To ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities within the site.

119

16. That BEFORE any works of any description start on the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, a comprehensive site investigation report shall be submitted to and for the approval of the said Authority. The investigation must be carried out in accordance with current best practice advice, such as BS 10175 : 'The Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites' or CLR 11, The report must include a site specific risk assessment of all relevant pollution linkages and a conceptual site model. Depending on the results of the investigation, a detailed Remediation Strategy may be required.

Reason: To establish whether or not site decontamination is required in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

That any remediation works identified by the site investigation required in terms of Condition 16 above, shall be carried out to the satisfaction of the Planning Authority. A certificate (signed by a responsible Environmental Engineer) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that any remediation works have been carried out in accordance with the terms of the Remediation Strategy.

Reason: To ensure that the site is free of contamination in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of future residents.

That BEFORE the development hereby permitted starts, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Planning Authority, full details of the proposed surface water drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the said Authority. For the avoidance of doubt the drainage scheme must comply with the requirements of the publication titled 'Drainage Assessment : A Guide for Scotland' and any other advice subsequently published by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) or the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP). The post-development surface water discharges shall ensure that the rate and quantity of run-off to any watercourse are no greater than the pre-development run-off for any storm return period unless it can be demonstrated that a higher discharge is necessary to protect or improve the aquatic habitat. SUDS shall still be provided even where discharges are proposed to public sewers notwithstanding any conditions imposed by Scottish Water. If the details to be submitted affect the site layout, a revised planning application shall be submitted to the Planning Authority prior to any works of any description being commenced on the application site.

17.

18.

Reason: To ensure that the drainage scheme complies with best SUDS practice to protect adjacent watercourses and groundwater and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

19. Notwithstanding the requirements of condition (18) above and the details already submitted, before any development starts on site a full flood risk assessment shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Authority. For the avoidance of doubt, the Flood Risk Assessment must take account of Scottish Planning Policy 7 (SPP 7): Planning 81 Flooding Advice Note 69 (PAN 69): Planning and Building Standards Advice on Flooding.

Reason: In order that the Planning Authority might be satisfied that the proposed development will not give rise to flooding within the application site and will not increase the flood risk elsewhere.

20. That any flood mitigation works identified in the Flood Risk Assessment, approved in terms of Condition (19) shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Following the construction of all of the flood mitigation works and before the occupation of the last flat/house within the site, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in flood mitigation) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the

120

flood mitigation works have been constructed in accordance with the approved plans,

Reason: To ensure that the development site and adjacent land and property will not be subjected to unacceptable flooding in the interests of public safety and amenity.

That the SUDS compliant surface water drainage scheme approved in terms of Condition 18 shall be implemented contemporaneously with the development in so far as is reasonably practical. Within three months of the construction of the SUDS, and before any dwellinghouse or flat is occupied, a certificate (signed by a Chartered Civil Engineer experienced in drainage works) shall be submitted to the Planning Authority confirming that the SUDS has been constructed in accordance with the relevant CIRIA Manual and the approved plans.

21.

Reason: To safeguard adjacent watercourses and groundwater from pollution and in the interests of the amenity and wellbeing of existing and future residents adjacent to and within the development site.

Background Papers:

Application form and plans received 26th June 2007 Amended plans received 29th October, 6th November, 24th December 2007 and 15th January 2008 Bat Survey received 28th January 2008 Drainage Layout received 29th February 2008

Memos from Transportation Team Leader received 6th July and 19th November 2007 Memos from Geotechnical Team Leader received 31 st July 2007, 1 3'h August 2007 and 4'h March 2008 Memo from Head Of Protective Services received 26th July 2007 Memo from Landscape Services Manager received 23rd July 2007 Letter from Scottish Environment Protection Agency received 27th July 2007 Letter from Scottish Water received 13th July 2007 Letter from Scottish Power received 6th July 2007 Letter from British Gas received 6th July 2007

Letters from Alan Cole, 40 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 24th 28th June, 2nd and 24th July, 14thAugust, 5th, 12th, 24th November 2007 and 7th January 2008. Letter from I Hazlett. 26 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from I McAughey, 34 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from R Strock, 21 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from Mrs R McRae, 18 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from J McNulty, 2 Primrose Avenue, Bellshill, ML4 1 JW received 3rd July 2007 Letter from W Wilson, 32 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from A Gillies, 38 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, North Lanarkshire, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from A Love, 13 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from Flora Duncan, 22 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from W & A McNeil, 19 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from F McShane, 17 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 3rd July 2007 Letter from C Sneddon, 5 Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill, ML4 1 E2 received 3rd July 2007 Letter from Mr & Mrs Anthony S Gribbin, 3 Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill, ML4 1 E2 received 3rd July 2007 Letters from George Clark, 2 Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill, ML4 1EZ received 3rd July, 12th November 2007 and 7th January 2008 Letter from Mr & Mrs McLintock, 24 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 4th July 2007 Letter from E McFarlane & M Sommerville, 7 Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill, ML4 IEZ received 4th July 2007 Letter from D Girvan, 25 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 4th July 2007

121

Letters from E Petrucci, 31 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1EY received 4th July 2007 and 19’ November 2007 Letter from J Vitale, 23 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 4th July 2007 Letters from Mr & Mrs Alexander Massie, 36 Croftpark Street, Bellshill, ML4 1 EY received 12th July and 19th November 2007 Letter from Michael McMahon, 188 Main Street, Bellshill, ML4 1AE received 17th September 2007

Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005) Glasgow and Clyde Valley Structure Plan 2000

Any person wishing to inspect these documents should contact Mr Alistair Maclean at 01698 302093.

Date: 5 March 2008

122

APPLICATION NO. S/07/01113/FUL

REPORT

1.

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.

2.1

3.

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

3.5

3.6

Description of Site and Proposal

This application is for the construction of a block of 4 flats and a pair of semi-detached houses on the site of an existing house at the corner of Croftpark Street and Hilltop Avenue, Bellshill. There is currently one dwellinghouse on the site which would require to be demolished to accommodate the proposed development. The flatted block and the semis will be two-storey in height with pitched roofs. The flatted block will be 8.1 metres in height to the ridge of the pitched roof with the semi-detached block slightly lower. This will be similar in height to two-storey properties in the close vicinity.

The site is generally flat and is within a residential area close to North Road. The surrounding development is a mixture of single storey detached houses and two storey semi-detached and terraced houses. There are also some 3-storey flatted blocks in the area although not in the immediate vicinity.

As originally submitted the proposal was for 9 flats rising to 3 storeys, however discussions with the applicants have led to the plans being revised to the present proposal as described above.

Development Plan

The site is within an area zoned as HSG8 ‘Established Housing Areas’ in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005).

Consultations and Representations

Scottish Water did not object but commented that there are known issues within the Waste Water Network. They also require a separate drainage system adopting the principle of SUDS to treat surface water discharge. Otherwise, the infrastructure providers had no adverse comments on the development.

SEPA commented that the development proposes to drain foul and surface water to the public sewer and advised that Scottish Water be consulted. Should Scottish Water require surface water to be excluded from the sewerage network then the principle of SUDS should be adopted. They also commented on separate consents required from them in terms of potential controlled waste disposal and that the development should provide for domestic waste disposal in line with the Council’s collection and Area Waste plans.

Protective Services advised that a full site investigation should be carried out to determine the existence of any contaminants. They advised on construction hours for the development and that best practical means should be employed to control site dust.

The Transportation Team Leader has no objections subject to conditions with regard to access, parking and sightlines.

The Council’s Conservation and Greening Section expressed concern that the building may potentially be used by bats and recommended a survey be undertaken.

The Geotechnical Team Leader has indicated that insufficient information has been submitted in order to assess this application.

123

3.7 There have been 34 letters of objection from 22 addresses with regard to this development and a petition with 47 signatures also objecting to the proposal. While the earlier objections addressed the original application which was for 9 flats, subsequent neighbour notification for the present proposal has seen a number of objectors reiterating their objection, primarily to the construction of flats, The petition was received after the development was scaled down to an application similar to the one presently being considered, i.e. for four flats and two semi- detached houses. A number of the objectors stated they would have no issues with a small number of house plots. The points of objection to the original and revised plans are summarised as follows:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 8 9

I 0

11

12

13

Flats will be out of character as the surrounding properties are detached bungalows and semi-detached villas; thus this represents over-development. Development should be in keeping with surrounding properties; it will dwarf other houses in the street due to its height; the roof pitch is not in keeping with others in the vicinity; the design could accommodate attic accommodation in future; it will result in overshadowing of and reduced daylightlsunlight to existing houses and would lead to a reduction in privacy because of overlooking. Building would protrude beyond building line in Croftpark Street - flats are less than 4 metres distant from footway; open space is below Council Guidelines; boundary fences would be out of character; and the development would obstruct views from existing houses. No design statement has been submitted and no justification provided as to why house is to be demolished. The proposal would create traffic and pedestrian safety issues as: the additional parking and vehicle movement will add to existing congestion and demand for inadequate parking spaces; the location of the car park would cause problems entering and exiting the street and would result in damage to cars parked on-street; there is no turning area within the site thus traffic cannot be controlled safely; the proposal would hamper access for a disabled person who lives opposite the site in Croftpark Street; the access on Croftpark Street will affect accessibility to surrounding properties; the amount of parking proposed is inadequate; insufficient sightlines at the Croftpark Street / Hilltop Avenue junction and the car park access; congestion would spread to North Road; the roadway within the car park is only 5.5 metres; work to create accesses has already been undertaken on site. The development would lead to an increase in litter bins on the footway on collection days as there is no access for bin lorries to manoeuvre within the site; these would also impede pedestrian flow and could cause accidents; bin store area is insufficient for amount of bins required and is too close to adjacent property; residents would have to wheel their bins 50 metres to collection point on Croftpark Street. There are sewerage, drainage and water issues; no drainage details have been submitted. The development will increase noise and disturbance. It is general procedure for a desk-top study report to be submitted to assess contamination as a previous owner ran a car business and the site was used for parking a recovery lorry which may have resulted in on-site contamination; also fear that the premises may be used for sale of cars. The development will have an impact on natural environment as there are bats within the area and the planning authority should ascertain whether there are any on site - a study should be submitted. There will be an adverse effect on house prices; the flats are likely to be rented out which will adversely affect the social mix of the area; a flatted development will lead to the area being more densely populated escalating anti-social behaviour. Neighbour notification is invalid as the application was not submitted at the time of the neighbour notification and used wrong form (Central area), also time to respond inadequate; description of proposed development and site ownership is insufficient; clarification required as to why the applicant's address and address of proposal are different given it's the same property. Various inaccuracies and lack of details in the application form and drawings such as no footpath access shown from the Croftpark Street parking area to the flats; the plans are not

124

at the scales detailed within the Council’s guidance to applicants. There is insufficient information on construction times.

14 Non-compliance with Building Standards as southern gable of flats is on the boundary and there are windows proposed in that boundary.

4. Planning Assessment and Conclusions

4.1 The application raises no strategic issues and requires to be assessed against the relevant development plan policies which are in the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policies HSG8 (Established Housing Areas), HSGI I (Infill Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development), together with the Council’s Adopted Open Space Guidelines for minimum spacing requirements around dwellings are relevant to this proposal.

The site is located within an established housing area in the Southern Area Local Plan, Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). Policy HSG8 (Established Housing Areas) applies and states that the Council will seek to protect the established character of existing and new housing areas by opposing development which is incompatible with a residential setting or adversely affects the amenity of Established Housing Areas. The proposal is for a residential development and therefore accords with the general principle of this Policy.

When assessing applications for infill residential developments on suitable gap sites, Policy HSGI 1 applies and states that consideration be given to the: 1. Overall impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area; 2. Dimensions of the site relative to the proposed development and associated garden ground; 3. Effect of infill on the garden space, privacy, and sunlight received by surrounding properties; 4. Scale, materials, roof heighffpitch and window patterns, and 5. Provision of vehicular access and parking arrangements.

In assessing the impact of the proposal on the character and amenity of the surrounding area, the site is bound by residential dwellings which are of various styles, heights and finishes. It is considered that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of the overall design, scale and style within this residential setting. There will be no detrimental impact on the amount of daylight or sunlight enjoyed by the surrounding dwellings due to the distance between the proposed and surrounding dwellings. The distance between existing windows and those on the proposed development is acceptable as they meet the minimum recommended distances. In addition, there is an existing 1.8 metre high screen fence which will add further to the screening. The submitted plans show this fence as being retained. In terms of proposed garden ground, the proposal complies with the Council’s Adopted Open Space Guidelines for both the flatted and the semi-detached dwellings. The provision for vehicular access and parking arrangements are acceptable as detailed in the following paragraph. Thus the proposed development satisfies Policy HSGI 1.

In assessing the transportation implications of a development, Policy TR13 states that the Council will take account of various criteria including the impact of the development on road traffic circulation and road safety, and the provision made for access, parking and vehicle manoeuvring. As indicated at paragraph 3.2 my Transportation Section have confirmed they have no objections to this application subject to conditions. Therefore the development is in accord with Policy TRI 3.

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6 Further details have been submitted and Scottish Water have confirmed that these are acceptable. Conditions are proposed to address the issues raised by the Geotechnical Team Leader.

125

4.7 With regard to the Conservation and Greening Section's concerns, a Bat Survey was undertaken and the Ecologist accepts the findings of the report and has no concerns with regard to the development.

In relation to the points of objection my comments are as follows: 4.8

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

There is a variety of house styles in the immediate surrounding of this proposal, varying from single storey to two storey, with a varying degree of pitched roofs; while there are no flats in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development, there are 3-storey flats in Baird Place, some 75 metres from the site, and MacKenzie Terrace. The development generally accords with Council standards and does not represent over-development of the site. Adjacent to the proposed flats are bungalows and two storey houses. The overall height has been reduced from the original plans which included a three storey element and the flats now proposed would be of a similar height (8.1 metres) as the houses immediately across Croftpark Street; the proposal is for a residential development, in keeping with the surrounding area; the design is acceptable; sunlightldaylight tests have been undertaken and the development will not cause any significant loss of either; the distance between windows on the proposed flats to existing windows meets the minimum requirement of 18 metres. In addition an existing 1.8 metre high screen fence will alleviate most of the privacy concerns, I propose a condition that this fence be retained and upgraded as necessary. Croftpark Street has a fairly regular building line but curves in front of this plot; Hilltop Avenue has a less regular building line broken by a house on North Road and an extension to a house at 40 Croftpark Street. The Council's Guide to Open Space does not specify minimum distances for flatted properties, nevertheless I find the setting of the development acceptable. The amenity space around the flats is approximately 170 sq.m., slightly above the minimum requirement under the Council Guidelines of 160 sq.m.; there is already a fence at the boundary with No.2 Hilltop Avenue; views from existing houses would not be substantially impeded. A design statement for demolition of a house is not required. The present bungalow has no special architectural or locational merit thus there is no reason to require its retention. The Transportation Team Leader is satisfied with the parking and access provision and has no objections subject to conditions which are incorporated within my recommendation. Refuse lorries would stop on Croftpark Street for the semis and Hilltop Avenue for the flats. Residents would require to place bins on the footway as at present; there would be an increase in bins but this should not cause any undue impedance to pedestrian traffic; the bin store area for the flats should be adequate to accommodate 8 bins but a condition is proposed to require details of the bin store and would include the requirement for a suitable enclosure; the distance from bin storage to the footway would not be sufficient reason or justification for refusal of planning permission. Scottish Water and SEPA have not raised any objection to the proposed development. There will be an increase in noise during the construction phase in common with any building operations, but any increase thereafter as a result of the development will not be significant and not out of place within an established residential area. It is not normal practice to require a desk study at this stage. As is normal procedure in such circumstances, I propose conditions that a site investigation be undertaken before development commences to investigate any possible contamination, and any remediation be undertaken prior to development being commenced. The Council's Ecologist expressed concern only with regard to the potential presence of bats. A Bat Survey was undertaken and the Ecologist accepts the findings of the report and has no concerns with regard to the development. The effect on house prices is not a valid planning consideration. The application is for residential development within a residential area and the tenure of the development is not a valid planning consideration. The addition of five residential units within this area will make no significant change to the social structure of the area or affect its amenities. The planning legislation lays down that 14 days are allowed for representations to be made by neighbours, nevertheless the Council's own procedures allow a minimum of 21 days

126

after registering an application before a decision can be made. The description on the Notice to Neighbours “Erection of 9 No. Flats” was quite precise, and the attached plan showed the correct site although the site was described as “Hilltop Avenue”. Nevertheless this was not incorrect as the developer proposes to take access from Hilltop Avenue.

13. The application was checked on receipt of the original, and various amendments, and has been found to be in order. Many of the points raised can either be dealt with by condition e.g. surfacing of roads, or are required for a Building Warrant submission, such as drainage and sewerage connections. Adequate information has been provided and plans scales are suitable to consider and process the planning application. Details of construction times are not a planning requirement.

14. The amended plans submitted in late October did show the flatted block on a boundary which would not have been acceptable under Building Standards, however this was quickly modified by the plans now submitted for consideration.

4.9 As stated in paragraph 3.7 above, a number of objectors mentioned that they would have no objection to the redevelopment of the site as individual house plots.

In conclusion, the present proposal meets Council standards and is in accord with Policies HSG8 (Established Housing Areas), HSGI 1 (Infill Housing Development) and TR13 (Assessing the Transportation Implications of Development) of the Southern Area Local Plan Finalised Draft (Modified 2001, 2004 and 2005). The development also accords with the Council’s Adopted Open Space Guidelines and its impact on adjacent residential properties is considered acceptable and in keeping with developments in the vicinity. Therefore, despite the objections raised, I recommend that permission be granted subject to conditions.

4.10

4.1 1 One objector has requested a site visit and hearing prior to the committee making a decision on this application. One other objector has requested a site visit be undertaken.

127