Children’s home at 32 Orton Avenue, Woodston, Peterborough

The site and surroundings

The site is a semi-detached two-storey dwelling with a driveway and amenity space in a predominantly residential part of Woodston.

“Description of the site and surroundings and Summary of the proposal…”

“Site and Surroundings The application site is found along Orton Avenue within a predominantly residential area in Woodston, Peterborough. The site comprises a semi-detached two storey dwelling, driveway and amenity space. The dwelling is constructed out of off-white render, concrete roof tiles and uPVC windows. Dwellings within the vicinity are of a similar design and appearance.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An application for a single-storey rear extension was permitted in 1984.

“Reference Proposal Decision Date P0499/84 Erection of a single storey extension on rear Permitted 09/07/1984”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal could not provide enough on-site parking and turning space for safe operation and staff shift changes.

“Officers have considered the operational statistics of the proposed use. The Applicant has confirmed that six staff would be employed, working on a shift basis with two changeovers per day. At these times, staff arriving and departing would overlap, and six vehicles could be present at the site simultaneously.”

“The Design and Access Statement confirms that four parking spaces are proposed within the site, with the remainder off-site. The four on-site parking spaces would be positioned side-by-side directly in front of the property. However, this arrangement would obstruct clear and safe pedestrian access to the main entrance of the property, the bin storage area and cycle storage. Furthermore, it would prevent wheelchair access.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The Local Highway Authority objected, Pollution Control had no objection, and Children’s Commissioning provided no comments.

“Children's Commissioning No comments received.”

“Summary: - The proposed development would not provide adequate facilities within the curtilage of the site for parking or turning of vehicles. - Four vehicles side by side would obstruct clear access to the front door of the building and also obstruct access to the proposed cycle storage and the bins at the rear. Access for wheelchairs or mobility scooters would not be possible when four cars are parked. Hence, only 3 cars could be parked providing safe clear access.”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Five objections from three addresses raised concerns about the school, pedestrian access, parking, shift changes, noise and privacy.

“DCCORPT_2018-04-04 3 Initial consultations: Total number of responses: Total number of objections: Total number in support: 0”

“Summary of planning considerations: - Proximity to school - Pedestrian access to the property - Parking available on-site/insufficient parking - Shift changeovers - Noise - Privacy…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant, who was also a councillor, said he had been advised to appoint the agent but had little time to arrange this.

The committee vote

Members proposed and seconded refusal, which passed with nine votes for, one against and one abstention.

“The Committee considered the report and representations. A motion was proposed and seconded to REFUSE the application. The Committee RESOLVED (9 For, 1 Against, 1 Abstention) to REFUSE the planning permission.”

Minutes

The final decision

Permission was refused because the proposal did not provide adequate parking, turning facilities or safe, convenient and sustainable access for all users.

“The proposal was unacceptable having been assessed in light of all material considerations, including conflict with relevant policies of the development plan and for the specific reasons given below.”

“The proposal would fail to provide adequate facilities within the curtilage of the site for the parking and turning of vehicles to serve the operational requirements of the proposed use and the safe, convenient and sustainable access to, from and within the site by all user…”

Minutes