The Principal Planning Officer presented the report.

Councillor Watson sought clarification as to why it was not possible to use the access via the Adult Community College. It was explained that adjacent to Scout Centre was the Adult Community College site, in October 2021 the Council submitted a Prior Notification application to demolish the site which was granted in November 2021 with works due to start in January 2022. She continued to explain currently the Scout Centre were accessing the site via the car park of the Adult Community College, and by approving the application would enable the Scouts to have their own access route as once the demolition work began there would be no pedestrian or vehicle access via that current route.  The officer also explained that there is an existing rear access serving the terrace of housing adjacent to the Scout Centre, and this rear access is also currently open to the Scout Centre but that it is not the Scouts Centre’s formal access Councillor Liddiard enquired as to whether any consultation had been completed relating to the number of vehicles using Richmond Road, he continued by stating whenever he had used the road there was always another vehicle coming towards him which would always leave one vehicle having to reverse towards the main road. The Chair of the Committee followed Councillor Liddiard’s question by seeking confirmation that if the Scouts would have legal access to the route proposed within the application. The Principal Planning Officer confirmed that the Scouts would be permitted legal access via Richmond Road and that this road was an unclassified road.

Councillor Kelly sought further clarification on the number of parking spaces to be used to create an entrance route for the Scouts Centre. He continued by explaining it had been suggested it would be more than the two spaces proposed by officers. The Principal Planning Officer explained in terms of the proposal within the application there would be a loss of two on street parking spaces to the length of 6.8 m.

The Chief Highways Engineer advised the Committee in general a parallel parking bay was between five and six meters in length, therefore the access being applied for would be less than what the Council would consider a viable parking space. He continued by commenting as there would be a need to allow a vehicle to manoeuvre in and out of the access point, officers estimated it was likely to be two vehicle spaces that would be lost to be able to provide necessary manoeuvrability.

Members enquired as to whether it would be possible for the college car park to be made available for residents use in the short term so to alleviate some of their parking concerns. The Principal Planning Officer advised Members the application site which was the area adjacent to the Scout Centre, didn’t go as far as the Adult Community College and so it was outside and beyond the limits of the application and unfortunately officers didn’t have any information on that.

Speaker statements were heard from:

Carol Evans, resident in objection

Councillor John Kent, ward member in objection

Councillor Watson stated that she had a family member who lived in the area and was aware of the traffic issues along those roads not to mention the impact on all local roads in the area of Richmond Road and the problem still reminded as to access down the road as it was difficult for the refuge lorries to be able to collect the bins. She further stated she didn’t understand how the Council could look to demolish the Adult Community College and not have a plan in place to offer residents somewhere to park.

Councillor Polley commented she felt a site visit could be worthwhile as she found it difficult to picture the site and the layout of the roads and therefore a site visit would enable Members a chance to view how the proposed access site would be use and the possibility of the potential to use of the front car park which had been previously been suggested.

Councillor Piccolo mentioned he felt there would be further loss than just two parking spaces as entry to the site would be 6m wide and a vehicle length was 4.8m. The Principal Planning Officer offered some clarity in that the proposed vehicle access would be 4.8m wide plus an additional 2ms width to allow for the pedestrian access making the proposed access width 6.8m overall.

The Chief Highways Engineer addressed Members clarifying some points which had been raised, the first was with regards to the parking restrictions issued he advised Members that within the conditions on the application it stated that access details were to be submitted to officers and agreed before any works could commence, he hoped this would give members some confidence that there were checks in place in terms of the access to the site within the application.

He continued by explaining as part of the next step within the application process with regards to parking restrictions this was to be subject to a separate consultation process through the Road Traffic Relations Act and this would entail a draft Traffic Regulation Order to be produced which would go out to consultation.

Councillor Polley put forward a recommendation for a site visit this was seconded by Councillor Byrne and put to the vote.

For: (3) Councillors Steve Liddiard (Vice-Chair), Gary Byrne and Lee Watson.

Against: (5) Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), James Halden, Susan Little, Terry Piccolo and Georgette Polley

Abstained (0)

The Chair of the Committee proposed the officer’s recommendation and was seconded by Councillor Halden.

For: (5) Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), James Halden, Susan Little, Terry Piccolo and Georgette Polley

Against: (3) Councillors Steve Liddiard (Vice-Chair), Gary Byrne and Lee Watson

Abstained (0)