Futures Forum: Knowle relocation project >>> Town Council planning committee unanimously rejects application 16/0872/MFUL
There has been quite a thread on the subject - with the most recent sections copied here:
Deirdre H
Polarising Plebeian
Real Sidmouthian
You only have to look at their minutes !! :http://www.sidmouth.gov.uk/images/PLANNING_MINS_01_06_16v2.pdf
Polarising Plebeian
Deirdre H
There were some very strong arguments against the size of the Pegasus development as it currently stands, one can only hope that the EDDC members will draw the same conclusion as the STC councillors did when they saw the plans. The development will probably go ahead in some form, the only possibility of it not going ahead would be if the size of the development was reduced dramatically and also if Pegasus have to pay CIL money, they may decide the enterprise is not as profitable as they had anticipated.
Polarising Plebeian
Mary W-T
PP. Why don't you think that they are strong arguments?
We have had so much hassle getting the Local Plan in place to guide future development and this goes completely against that plan in terms of housing numbers.
Although the Knowle is not in a Conservation Area ( I wonder why it was never included! ) it is adjacent to such areas and to Listed Buildings.
Planning law states that new developments which affect the setting of Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings should not change the character of the area or adversely impact upon them. So the points about the bulk and visual impact are pertinent.
Wrongly categorising the development's 'Class' is a breach of planning law.
Overlooking other properties is not permitted as it is an invasion of privacy, this is why in many cases windows are not allowed on certain walls in new buildings or extensions.
We have had so much hassle getting the Local Plan in place to guide future development and this goes completely against that plan in terms of housing numbers.
Although the Knowle is not in a Conservation Area ( I wonder why it was never included! ) it is adjacent to such areas and to Listed Buildings.
Planning law states that new developments which affect the setting of Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings should not change the character of the area or adversely impact upon them. So the points about the bulk and visual impact are pertinent.
Wrongly categorising the development's 'Class' is a breach of planning law.
Overlooking other properties is not permitted as it is an invasion of privacy, this is why in many cases windows are not allowed on certain walls in new buildings or extensions.
Mary W-T
I've just checked up on one objection to the last planning application. It seems to me that the same objections still apply.
https://www.visionforsidmouth.org/news/2012/november/objection-to-planning-application.aspx
https://www.visionforsidmouth.org/news/2012/november/objection-to-planning-application.aspx
Jeremy W
Thanks, Mary, for starting this thread.
And, yes, I'd agree with you that the the same objections from the rejected planning application of 1st March 2013 apply to this latest application:
> Loss of Parks and Recreation Ground: following a review in 2014, the amount Sidmouth has is even less today than in it was in 2013.
> Loss of Employment Land and Premises: whilst some will say this issue is now 'resolved', the fact is that when the EDDC's planning committee decided to reject the 2013 application, the provision for 50 dwellings was in the draft Local Plan. The fact is that Sidmouth will lose jobs and suffer economically - as the rather weak Economic Impact Study at the time admitted. There is an excellent alternative proposal - to keep the EDDC HQ in Sidmouth in the 1980s block and sell off the Victorian hotel as flats, which is actually what they were in the 1960s:
http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/a-truly-green-alternative-to-eddcs.html
> Impact on the Design and Local Distinctiveness: although the 2013 plans would have built right up to Station Road and the 2016 plans do not, it is clear that the 'impact' of this development goes even further, as commented on widely:
https://saveoursidmouth.com/2016/05/18/visual-impact-of-developers-plans-for-knowle-raises-concerns/
> Impact on Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest: whilst the rejected application of 2013 referred only the Grade II Listed Lodge as being threatened, there is also the Grade II Listed Summer House to consider - which the current plans will impact by building on the terraces immediately above.
This will in fact form part of the Vision Group's objection.
The preliminary comment is here:
https://www.visionforsidmouth.org/news/2016/may/vgs-futures-forum-comment-on-knowle-planning-application.aspx
and in full here: https://www.visionforsidmouth.org/media/102390/knowle-planning-application-16-0872-mful-ff-vgs-31may16.docx
And, yes, I'd agree with you that the the same objections from the rejected planning application of 1st March 2013 apply to this latest application:
> Loss of Parks and Recreation Ground: following a review in 2014, the amount Sidmouth has is even less today than in it was in 2013.
> Loss of Employment Land and Premises: whilst some will say this issue is now 'resolved', the fact is that when the EDDC's planning committee decided to reject the 2013 application, the provision for 50 dwellings was in the draft Local Plan. The fact is that Sidmouth will lose jobs and suffer economically - as the rather weak Economic Impact Study at the time admitted. There is an excellent alternative proposal - to keep the EDDC HQ in Sidmouth in the 1980s block and sell off the Victorian hotel as flats, which is actually what they were in the 1960s:
http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/a-truly-green-alternative-to-eddcs.html
> Impact on the Design and Local Distinctiveness: although the 2013 plans would have built right up to Station Road and the 2016 plans do not, it is clear that the 'impact' of this development goes even further, as commented on widely:
https://saveoursidmouth.com/2016/05/18/visual-impact-of-developers-plans-for-knowle-raises-concerns/
> Impact on Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest: whilst the rejected application of 2013 referred only the Grade II Listed Lodge as being threatened, there is also the Grade II Listed Summer House to consider - which the current plans will impact by building on the terraces immediately above.
This will in fact form part of the Vision Group's objection.
The preliminary comment is here:
https://www.visionforsidmouth.org/news/2016/may/vgs-futures-forum-comment-on-knowle-planning-application.aspx
and in full here: https://www.visionforsidmouth.org/media/102390/knowle-planning-application-16-0872-mful-ff-vgs-31may16.docx
Streetlife | Knowle and Pegasus plans
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment