Agenda item

Additional storey to accommodate 6no. roof top apartments with three new staircase pods and associated cycle stores, bin stores and parking to 1-12 Kensal Rise. [Fishergate] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application by Mr David Jones for an additional storey to accommodate 6 no. roof top apartments with three new staircase pods and associated cycle stores, bin stores and parking to 1-12 Kensal Rise.

In their update to Members, Officers informed them that following the site visit the applicant had provided the following information;

·        The gravel parking spaces in the south west corner of the site are accessed from the highway via the tarmac hard standing which served the garage owned by occupiers of the flat 1, Kensal Rise. This is an existing arrangement that had worked for a number of years under the control of flat 1 and the applicant did not foresee any future issues with the addition of the six roof top flats.

·        The three proposed visitor parking spaces accessed from the turning head would be for private use only, for both existing and proposed flats. The three proposed visitor parking spaces will be managed by the residents of the flats through the residents association.

·        The three proposed visitor parking spaces accessed from the turning head would create a level difference of about 0.5 metres between the front garden and the parking spaces. The level difference would need a retaining wall and a 1.2 metre fence to prevent the possibility of someone falling. This would meet the requirements of the Building Regulations.

·        That a full photographic condition survey of Kensal Rise flats and the road would be undertaken prior to construction.

·        The two balconies fronting Kensal Rise and the side balcony with potential views into the rear garden of No. 14 Kensal Rise would all have restricted access through the use of fixed glazing and windows. See drawing 870.12.B Proposed Floor Plans and 870.13.B Proposed Elevations and Sections.

·        The Freeholder/owner of the flats had a duty/legal obligation to maintain a proportion of the road.

The other freehold owners accessed from Kensal Rise had a duty/legal obligation to maintain the remainder.

·        With regard to the potential for washing lines erected on the proposed balconies, communal washing lines/rotary driers would be provided within the rear hard standing areas in required. The applicant was happy for this to be conditioned.

·        With regard to potential construction noise and nuisance the appointed main contractor would be notified of his duties to the neighbouring properties and would be asked to make contact with potentially affected properties. This would be monitored through site meetings.

It was also reported that Members and the public were concerned that the use of the existing hardstanding next to flat 1 for additional parking would be dangerous because it would result in cars reversing out on to Cemetery Road. The Council’s Highways Officers did not object to the use of the hardstanding for parking because it was an existing situation, the space could only accommodate up to three cars, and cars using it would be unlikely to reverse out on to Cemetery Road as it would be just as easy to exit Kensal Rise in forward gear.

Officers recommended that as the only new section of the fence was around the three parking bays at the turning head they recommended that if Members approved the application, that the proposed condition 6 (requiring details of all boundary treatment) be amended.

Representations in objection were received from a local resident, Coral Fisher. She felt that Kensal Rise was very narrow and would not be able to support additional traffic. She commented in response to questions posed by Members that she would support additional parking spaces at the turning head as long as these were available for all residents to use. She stated that she would be happier if the fence around the three visitor parking spaces was the same height, this was because she felt reluctant to have a view of the fence as other fences in the area had not been maintained well.

Representations were received from the Chair of Fishergate Planning Panel, Michael Wills. He expressed a number of concerns relating to parking and the road conditions of Kensal Rise. He highlighted that a single parking space in front of a garage had been shown on the applicant’s plan and expressed a concern that this would be knocked down in order for more parking spaces to be inserted. He felt that if the development was not approved that the existing site would be severely damaged, delivery vehicles would block people in and the road would not be wide enough to pass.

Representations were received from the agent, Phil Rickinson. He felt and informed Members that the building needed maintenance and in the roof’s case constant maintenance, the existing steps up the back of the building were not visually appealing. He added that the applicant was responsible for the half frontage of the road but that they did not have control over the area of hardstanding.

Members were informed that if approved a construction management plan could specify that the Kensal Rise entrance to the site not be used by construction vehicles but that the rear entrance could be used instead.

Some Members felt that although they accepted there was a housing need that they were not happy about road safety on the junction and who would have the responsibility to maintain the site.

In relation to the suggested construction management plan, it was noted that the Council would not be able to enforce the condition if construction vehicles used Kilburn Rise. Officers could only encourage the applicant to adhere to a construction management plan.

Resolved:  That the application be approved subject to a Section 106 agreement and to the following amended and additional conditions;

6.               The proposed 0.5m-high retaining wall and 1.2m-high fence around the proposed visitor parking bays at the eastern end of Kensal Rise shall match the existing boundary wall/fence along Kensal Rise in colour, appearance and materials.

Reason:    In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.

Additional Condition

10.             Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, a detailed method of works statement identifying the programming and management of site clearance/preparatory and construction works shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Such a statement shall include at least the following information;

                   - the routing that will be promoted by the contractors to use main arterial routes and avoid the use of Kensal Rise and the peak network hours

                   - where contractors will park

                   - where materials will be stored within the site

                   - measures employed to ensure no mud/detritus is dragged out over the adjacent highway.

Reason:    To ensure that the development can be carried out in a manner that will not be to the detriment of amenity of local residents, free flow of traffic or safety of users.

Reason:    The proposal accords with national planning policy set out in the National Planning Policy Framework and relevant policies of the 2005 City of York Development Control Local Plan. The proposal is acceptable. The application requires a contribution of £5744 towards open space.