Three parking meters at Forth Street, North Berwick

What was proposed

The application proposed three solar-powered parking meters, bollards and a kerbed hardstanding area at Forth Street and nearby locations.

“Of the three proposed parking meters, one would be positioned on the east side of the corner of Forth Street with Viewforth and one on the east corner of Viewforth with a lane leading to the beach (opposite Market Place). The other would be positioned on is what of the part of the public road on the north side of Forth Street opposite nos. 60a and 62 Forth Street.”

“The propos ed parking meters would operate using solar energy, therefore they would not require any cabling or connection to existing utilities and would operate independently. It is proposed that the parking meters would be bolted to the public footway surface meaning no excavation would be required.”

Officer report

Application changes

Two additional meters originally proposed on Beach Road were removed because that road was not included in the application address.

“This application is one of 12 applications proposing a total of 27 parking meters in different locations in North Berwick.”

“Since this application was registered revised drawings have been received omitting 2 additional parking meters that were originally proposed at locations on Beach Road, as Beach Road was not included in the application address on the planning application form.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended consent because the meters would not harm the conservation area, neighbouring amenity, landscape, heritage or flood risk interests.

“Gi ven the distance between the other parking meters proposed elsewhere in North Berwick and the intervening land and buildings between them, the proposed parking meters would not lead to any harmful cumulative impact. The propo sed parking meters would not cause a loss of amenity to any neighbouring residential property. The Council's Landscape Officer acknowledges that the application site lies within the North Berwick Conservation Area.”

“The Council's Flooding & Structures Officer advises that SEPA's Flood Hazard Mapping indicates that the site is not at risk from a flood event with a return period of 1 in 200 years, plus climate change. That is the 0.5% annual risk of a flood occurring in any one year, with an allowance for climate change.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Road Services raised no objection subject to footway, drainage, road safety audit and topographical survey controls, while other council officers also raised no objection.

“The Council's Road Services advise that the location of the proposed parking meter and associated infrastructure as shown in Inset A requires the proposed physical infrastructure (bollards and kerbed area) to be provided to protect the meter and users from unintended vehicle strikes, and therefore recommends that a Stage 2 Road Safety Audit will be required for the detailed design of the development, and a further Stage 3 Road Safety Audit mut also be provided.”

Officer report

Objections received

Nine written representations opposed the development, citing visual harm, cumulative impact, pedestrian obstruction, emergency access, road safety and conservation concerns.

“* Viewforth is very narrow and use of the parking meter would restrict access for emergency vehicles. * The proposed parking meters would amount to a disfigurement of the conservation area with street clutter and visual affronts; * The address for the parking meters is incorrect; * Applications for parking meters should not be split into separate applications and the cumulative impact should be considered; * Individual applications fundamentally misrepresent the scale and…”

Officer report

Views expressed at committee

Committee members and officers discussed pedestrian safety, pavement widths, building maintenance, notification, visual clutter and the locations of the meters and bollards.

Members’ debate

Councillor Findlay opposed the proposal under conservation policy, while other members noted the road safety audit and possible traffic-calming effect.

“Councillor Findlay reiterated that his objection to all proposals related to LDP Policy CH2. He agreed with the objectors’ comments about the proposed locations of the two most easterly cabinets, due to their positioning on walkways to the beach, and near to the Hope Rooms and a licensed premises. He would vote against the officer’s recommendation.”

“The Convener pointed out that the build out may act as a traffic calming measure, and acknowledged that the Road Safety Audit would be undertaken prior to the commencement of the development. Councillor McMillan echoed these comments.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Members supported the officer’s recommendation to grant consent, with Councillor Findlay voting against it.

“The Convener then moved to a roll call vote on the officer’s recommendation to grant consent. Planning Committee members voted in support of the officer’s recommendation, apart from Councillor Findlay, who voted against the recommendation.”

Minutes