Planning – Application Comments

Consultation Date: Mon 20 Nov 2023

Consultation Date: Mon 20 Nov 2023

Consultation Date: Thu 07 Sep 2023

Consultation Date: Thu 14 Sep 2023

Comment Date: Mon 05 Feb 2024

Whilst we appreciate that the proposed retaining/boundary wall has now been removed and instead replaced with a hedge row to alleviate pressure on the RPA of the trees adjacent to this site (protected by TPO No 537), the RPA of tree T02 is still being encroached by the main dwelling. Additionally, the RPA of 03 includes an area of landscaping including raised beds which may lead to further damage to T03 through compaction/excavation etc.

The British Standard states that the default position should be that structures are located outside of RPAs of trees to be retained; and that technical solutions may be available for use where there is an overriding justification for construction in the RPA. As there is no justification provided and given that the applicant is unlikely to be able to provide one that we would find acceptable, we cannot support these proposals and therefore uphold our objection in principle.

Comment Date: Mon 11 Sep 2023

Petersfield Close EDG23.001-FRSR-031.pdf

Comment Date: Mon 04 Sep 2023

Plymouth City Council
Strategic Planning & Infrastructure

Transport Planning Team
Telephone: 01752 307707
Date: 4th September 2023
Abbey Edwards
Development Management
Ballard House
West Hoe Road
Plymouth
PL1 3BJ

Dear Abbey

Highway Authority Consultation Reply

APPLICATION NO: 23/01165/FUL

SITE: 28 Petersfield Close, Plymouth, PL3 6QP

DEVELOPMENT: Erection of detached dwelling with associated car parking, refuse storage and amenity space.


Observations:

I refer to your consultation dated 21st August 2023 regarding the planning application for the construction of a single detached dwelling on land at Petersfield Close. I note that this proposal is similar to previous applications, 21/00211/FUL which was withdrawn and 21/01071/FUL which was refused and subsequently dismissed at appeal.

However, the site is generally covered by way of an extant planning permission which therefore sets precedent for continued development up to the approved quantum of development. It is therefore anticipated that permission for this proposal could be granted in principle, subject to a full review of detail, by the Planning Authority. Although a recent committee decision refused a proposal on adjacent land and included a highway related refusal reason.

The Highway Authority have continually raised concerns regarding the construction and inadequacy of the existing estate road. It is extremely steep and therefore does not provide safe and suitable access for a residential development for all users. It does not lend itself towards promoting walking and cycling as a sustainable mode of travel for existing or future residents and therefore fails meet to local and national policy requirements.

The application should therefore be refused.

If minded to grant permission, then the proposal must meet the design requirements as identified within the Development Guidelines SPD, July 2020. In this regard the internal dimension of the garage must be 3.5m x 6.5m and provision for Electric charging should be provided.

It is evident from the proposed plans that sufficient quantum of parking is proposed, by way of a garage and a private drive, thus providing the required two spaces. Adequate space is available internally to the dwelling for cycle storage.

The applicant must ensure that the drive is appropriately surfaced and drained to prevent loose material and private surface water depositing onto the road. The plans show a permeable driveway which would be acceptable in this regard.

The estate road should be extended to full construction across the frontage of the proposed dwelling.

In order to ensure that any construction activities do not give rise to access restrictions or damage to the highway a strict code of practice detailing how the construction will take place should be submitted. This should also include for a dilapidation survey of the highway, including the junction to Eggbuckland Road itself. It is evident that damage to the carriageway has occurred with large vehicles leaving the estate road. A photographic record of the current state of highway should be submitted to the Highway Authority and following construction a second survey undertaken.

Any damage caused by the developer must be rectified, at the developers cost, in accordance with the Highway Authorities requirements.

Suitable conditions should therefore be attached to any grant of consent to address all of the above matters.

However, the recommendation of the Highway Authority is that planning permission should not be granted and therefore recommends that the application be refused.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recommendation:

The Highway Authority recommend that planning is refused for the following reason

ZREF10 - Sub Standard access: AMENDED
It is considered that the proposed access arrangement, by virtue of the increased use of Petersfield Close and the junction to Eggbuckland Road, is unsuitable for its intended and intensified use and is therefore likely to give rise to issues of personal and highway safety. The development of the site is not considered to be sustainable in that the occupants would be dependent on the private car as a means of getting to and from the site, for almost all journeys, due to the excessive gradients of Petersfield close preventing a suitable access for pedestrians and cyclists from being provided. As a result the additional vehicular movements arising from the development would give rise to conditions likely to cause:-
(a) Prejudice to public safety and convenience;
(b) Interference with the free flow of traffic on the highway;
(c) unwarranted hazard to vehicular traffic;
which is contrary to Policy DEV29 of the Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan adopted March 2019.


Craig Oakes
Transport Planning Consultant

Consultant authorised to sign on behalf of the Service
Director for Strategic Planning & Infrastructure

Comment Date: Fri 01 Sep 2023

946909 Consultation Response.pdf