Agenda item

PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Minutes:

The Committee reviewed applications received up until Friday 1 October 2021.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that no objection be made to application reference CB/21/04134 (55 Kestrel Way), subject to parking standards being met.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that no objection be made to application reference CB/21/04146 (73 Wing Road, Linslade), subject to parking standards being met.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that no objection be made to application reference CB/21/04175 (81 Church Street), subject to parking standards being met.

 

RESOLVED to note applications CB/21/04152 and CB/21/04154/SECM (Chamberlains Barn).

 

The Committee discussed the proposals to convert former office accommodation into residential flats at Church Square, Leighton Buzzard.  Whilst noting that the premises were originally for residential use and not necessarily objecting to a return to residential use, a number of concerns were raised regarding the specific applications.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council objection to applications CB/21/04077 and CB/21/04078/LB (8 Church Square) and CB/21/04075 and CB/21/04076/LB (4-6 Church Square) on the following grounds:

 

(i)            Concerns regarding traffic movement, particularly on exiting from Judges Lane due to poor visibility and high volume of pedestrians accessing the church and the schools;

(ii)          Concerns regarding the adequacy of the proposed size for flats;

(iii)         Lack of light in the basement flat and concern that with the bedroom moved to the front of the property, this would be adversely impacted by town centre noise and in contradiction to proposals for other flats;

(iv)         The proposed car park extension would result in a loss of green space and potential risk to protected trees;

(v)          That the noise impact assessments had been undertaken in the very quiet months of January/February and were therefore not representative;

(vi)         That the proposed double glazing to mitigate noise concerns would not be in keeping with the character of the listed building and would have a detrimental impact on the appearance of the façade and the listed status of the entire terrace.

(vii)        That the lack of interest in letting for commercial use could be a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and that active marketing was a condition of policy EMP2 in the recently adopted Local Plan.

Should Central Bedfordshire Council be minded to approve the applications, the Town Council would request the following measures:

(viii)      That measures be put in place for pedestrian safety at the vehicular access to Judges Lane and

(ix)         Should the planning authority be minded to approve the application then the Town Council would request consideration be given to a deed of easement to protect local businesses.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that objection be made to application reference CB/21/04062 (29 Atterbury Avenue) on the grounds that the balcony was a substantial structure likely to result in overlooking and loss of privacy for neighbouring properties.

The Committee discussed application reference CB/18/02615/RM. Although outside the parish boundary, the Town Council had been informally consulted a number of times over recent years in respect of proposals for public open space and play areas, although recommendations made were not reflect in the current application, which was disappointing. Whilst not within the parish, the Committee agreed to recommend objection.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council objection to application reference CB/21/02615/RM (Clipstone Park, land south of Vandyke Road and north of Stanbridge Road) on the following grounds:

 

(i)            The proposed hard surface to be included offered no play value unless a facility such as a goal end or basketball net was included;

(ii)          The proposed colour red for the play area entrance gates would not offer sufficient contrast for children and be unsuitable for those who were colour blind;

(iii)         The play areas were all very similar – to each other and to existing play areas in the town – and therefore offered limited play value;

(iv)         The proposed grass matting safety surfacing was the cheapest option offering least durability or protection, whilst also making grounds maintenance under and around play equipment more difficult in future;

(v)          It was recommended that the proposed Multi Use Games Area be fitted with acoustic washers to mitigate potential noise nuisance;

(vi)         That limited consideration appeared to have been given to the orientation of proposed sports pitches;

(vii)        That proposals appeared to include too much grass and too few trees, particularly not enough street trees;

(viii)      Proposals were not felt to be in keeping with the Leighton-Linslade Green Wheel Strategy (no green corridor)

 

The Town Council would further comment that any intended nominee for the sites should be included in discussions for facilities which they would later manage.

 

RESOLVED to recommend to Central Bedfordshire Council that no objection be made to the following applications:

 

1.         CB/21/04035                                         64 SOUTH STREET

2.            CB/21/03944                                       37 LINWOOD DRIVE

3.            CB/21/04103                                       26 LAKE STREET

4.            CB/21/04127                                       74 COOPER DRIVE

5.         CB/21/04090                                       21 TAYLORS RIDE

6.      CB/21/03318/ADV                    TAYWOOD HOUSE, CLIPSTONEBROOK

LOWER SCHOOL

7.         CB/21/03694/LB                                 2B OLD ROAD, LINSLADE

 

Supporting documents: