Agenda item

The Planning Officer presented the report and outlined the reasons for approval as detailed in the report.  The application has been supported by data and monitoring information which showed under capacity of the site, for every car parked in the car park 2-3 cars were parked on the verge.  Currently there is no mitigation for verge parking so there is an impact on the land.  Verge parking could be limited by using byelaws to better enforce verge parking and to act as a deterrent along with increased liaison and education on site to encourage parking in the car park. 

The tree protection plan has been viewed by the Conservation Officer and there has been a Landscape Visual Appraisal (LVA).  The site would be visible throughout the year.

Some Members had visited the site the previous day.

The following points were discussed:

·         There is a mature oak tree on the proposed site which would need chopping down, it was felt that to remove an oak tree to accommodate parking was not acceptable.

·         Members agreed that there is currently a massive problem with road parking.

·         The timeline for the Traffic Regulation Order was discussed.  There is a reluctance to have a TRO due to the yellow lines however this is an effective way of keeping cars of the verges. We own the verges around Dennis Knoll and therefore can use byelaws to enforce the parking.

·         A section 101 agreement allows local authorities to transfer powers to each other; discussions are currently ongoing with DCC with a view to implementing an effective  enforcement plan for the verges.

·         The site is on elevated land so would be visible but this needs to be weighed against the current non-restricted parking which has no screening at all.

·         Alternative layouts for the car park have been considered.  The current layout does manage to protect some of the trees but it is not possible to save all of the trees so this needs to be properly mitigated.

·         There was a request to see if it is possible to blur the back line of the car park so that it is not so linear.

·         Members felt a management plan for the screening and planting at the Eastern End of the car park is required.

·         Members felt the plans should be looked at to protect some of the larger trees on the site.

15:30pm K Richardson left the room and returned at 15:34pm

15:33pm L Hartshorne left the room and returned at 15:35pm

Members were minded to approve the application however new plans were requested to incorporate more landscaping at the eastern end of the car park along with plans to protect more of the larger trees on site.

A motion to defer the application to allow for amendments to the landscaping at the eastern end of the car park along with amendments to protect some of the larger trees on site, was moved, seconded, put to the vote and carried.  The decision on the new proposals to be delegated to the Head of Planning in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Planning Committee. 

RESOLVED:

That the application be DEFERRED for the following reasons:

1.    To allow for amendments to the landscaping at the eastern end of the car-park.

2.    To agree amendments to protect some of the larger trees on site.