Planning Matters

Planning Matters

As ever, many many planning applications have been considered by the Society. This involves perusing the Local Authority planning lists containing, typically, 30 to 50 applications every fortnight. Applications of interest or/and concern are viewed by a small sub-committee, usually comprising of Tudor Owen and Bob Price, meeting on a fortnightly basis to consider the applications and then make representation, as appropriate.

Comments in respect of some recent planning applications are summarised below for your information.

Pendine Medical Centre, Summerhill (Application P/2007/1026)

The proposal is described as a Dementia Care Centre of Excellence, which may or may not be an accurate description medlcally but it most certainly is not an accurate description for the design proposals which are very bland and, it would seem, budget driven, being anything but excellent. For such a major proposal, it is most disturbing that there Is no indication of a comprehensive development plan; the proposed Centre would appear to have little or no real relationship to existing blocks and with no proper landscaping proposals. It would seem that landscaping associated with previous proposals has not been executed and that if allowed, this proposal would negate the Implementation of the landscaping previously proposed. Under the heading of ‘Design’ in the Design and Access Statement there are a number of points made by the Applicant which, at the very least, require clarification and proper justification and which, subject to this, should be seriously questioned. References to ‘... long unbroken corridors... of necessity repetitive, functional and legible’ and ‘... constant width for ease of layout and good daylighting...’ would appear to be more appropriately described as creating confusion, boredom and institutionalization for the occupants. Similarly references to massing and uncomplicated external appearance with uniform roof height further suggest blandness and banality, while it most certainly would not Integrate with the existing In any positive or sequential way. Overall a very disappointing and poor proposal which is depressingly bland and lacking in imagination both the layout and elevatlonal treatment to the extent that the Civic Society, regrettably, feels it must register its strong objection.

Wood Cottage, Pant Lane, Marford. (Application P2007/0669)

The Civic Society is very concerned about this applicatIon which, if allowed, could create a most unfortunate precedent of building within the woodland area. It is understood that the trees within the suggested site are covered by a TPO and yet some mature trees have only very recently been felled which must beg the question of justification especially when followed almost immediately by this particular application. Additionally, the requisite Forestry Commission felling licence has not been Included in the received documentation. Vehicular access is totally unrealistic, the present access being, probably, not mare than 2 metres wide and yet to try and facilitate a 3 metre wide access It is not only suggested that the corner of the existing building be “rounded off”(if required) but the existing hedge bordering the public footpath is to be reduced, obviously to try to allow for the increased width. The existing pavement crossing to Pant Lane is tortuous enough already without the addition of a further dwelling using the same crossing, while the footpath alongside the site is already constricted without the addition of a 2 metre high boarded fence which would be totally alien to the existing nature of the wood. It is noted that the suggested soakaway outfall would be outside the applicant’s boundary and into the wood: is this deemed to be acceptable? Also, the present use of tile land is described as “garden” which is surely a misnomer when in fact it is woodland, even if privately owned. The Society is sufficiently concerned about this application to object most strongly for the above reasons, and urges the Authority to equally strongly resist any further development into what should surely be a valuable and protected area of woodland.

Llay Hall Farm, Llay Road (Application P2007/0940)

The Civic Society is concerned that should this application be allowed, it could constitute a complete community of some 30 to 40 persons plus 15 to 20 vehicles; far too intensive and over developed. Elevations are unconvincing and pseudo authentic with little notation to indicate proposed materials and an opportunity has been lost to ratlonalise the door and window design. The site plan is lacking in quality and imagination devoid of any landscape detail and surely showing a significant underprovision for vehicle parking. On the above grounds the Civic Society must record its strong objection to this application and the proposed increase from 4 to 9 residential units.