10/01741/FUL - Bellfield Lane planning application

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

Yes.

It's a house for a local couple who have a child with severe cerebral palsy and epilepsy. Their current house isn't suitable for them as a family and they're not likely to find one in Portobello that is; hence the requirment for a new build.

The site is a commercial/light industrial site at the end of Bellfield Lane currently owned by Harris motors, so in many respects a house is more in keeping with the residential nature of the surroundings and should also reduce traffic down the lane.

I think it really is a rather good design and should be supported. However it's very rare for anyone to submit favourable comments on a Planning Application, you only ever get the negative.

But if anyone's interested they could look at the .

And if they think it's a design that should be approved thay could always submit a comment. It's quite easy. Just hit the Submit Comments button .

[Maria]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Lambie]

[seanie]

[Lambie]

[SoupDragon]

Why were other proposals to build in the lane knocked back?
Surely family housing is better than a rarely used out house or garage.

(I mean car paking garages rather than Mr Harris who services and MOTs my elderly Volvo )

[seanie]

Some have been approved and some knocked back, but most of them have been recommended for approval by Planning Officers either way.

One of the most recent rejection's just gone to appeal, which is not surprising given the Committee's reasons for refusal, against officer recommendation, were woefully thin.

In pure Planning terms the proposal meets all the relevant policies.

But Planning Committees are easily swayed by the sound and fury of a few objections. Especially if nobody says anything in favour.

[allaboardtheskylark]

Objections in the past have been for developing back gardens and lanes. Traffic is always raised as an issue.

On the right of the lane as you go down there has been attempts to develop the back gardens. This one is on the left side and is a brownfield site made available by the garage downsizing. It also seems to introduce parking space and a turning area which does not currently exist.

So less cars perhaps??? An improvement in access perhaps???

It gets rid of an ugly old brick shed and introduces a superb design with specific aims in mind.

An improvement and an enhancement in the area perhaps???

I would have thought to object fairly other options should be explored. Those who are so quick to object to this use for the land seem not to wish to explore other options and offer solutions.

Is this a familiar story in Portobello.

I will hit the button and back this application and the fuddy duddy brigade will just have to lump it.

[Puerto bella]

Hopefully it will be a delegated item and won't need to go to committee.

I wish them all the best with it. A good, well thought out design statement - very impressive.

[Porty]

I also think the design is very good and so much better than the current use of space. The proposed building is in keeping with its neighbours and with a contemporary twist. I will be supporting it.

Seanie, how does the development look when compared to prevailing planning policy?

[seanie]

It's supported by the residential windfall developent policies in the Structure & Local Plans.

By reducing traffic, due to the change from garage premises, it improves local amenity.

It follows the form, scale and massing of neighbouring properties, and meets all requirements in terms of privacy, overshadowing, daylighting and space.

The sustainabilty credentials would appear to be very good, with high levels of insulation and an inherently efficient heating system.

The Conservation Area appraisal essentially calls for high quality, sympathetic to the surroundings. So given the design, scale, massing and materials it should be seen as an enhancement over a garage/shed/parking lot.

I expect the Planners will recommend approval. What the Committee will do is anyone's guess.

[Porty]

[Pal of Porty]

[Porty]

[seanie]

[Pal of Porty]

[Porty]

[Maria]

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

Mike Bridgeman's attendance is pretty regular now. I know he didn't turn up much to begin wtih but I think that may've been due to personal circumstances rather than a lack of interest.

[Porty]

I meant Stuart Maxwell. I agree , KM's work rate is amazing and MB has definitely grown on me.. Neither has persuaded me to move closer to the SNP . I

Marya, if you choose to write to the sec to support the Bellfield Lane app, will you share it with us?

[Porty]

Now I am confusing things; Stuart Maxwell was the former communities minister!! Anyway, I know who I mean.

BTT- I hope the family succeed withe their application. It will enhance thiat wee bit of porty.

[Maria]

[Puerto bella]

[seanie]

[Bob Jefferson]

[Franck]

[Porty]

[allaboardtheskylark]

[allaboardtheskylark]

Once again I post on the wrong page Porty. Should have been on the surely not? page.

Must go to the huddies internet training. Its not easy to get the hang of this when you start using a computer when in your 70's. How does one follow the threads when one has lost the plot.

[Bob Jefferson]

[Bob Jefferson]

[seanie]

Dear Sir,

Planning Application; 10/01741/FUL, 9/2, Bellfield Lane, Portobello.

Portobello Community Council has considered the above application, and the following sets out the various views expressed along with our formal objection as a statutory consultee.

Objecting Comments

The Community Council has previously objected to several applications for new houses in this lane and should be consistent in its response to Planning Applications in this area.

Whilst a precedent has been set for some new houses to be built in this lane, the point has now come at which such a high degree of new development threatens to spoil the character of this part of the conservation area and the whole character of this lane which complements the unspoiled row of mid Victorian cottages, will have been radically altered.

Although this application relates to a brown field site, unlike the two recently refused applications for back-garden developments along the lane, there is still a very real danger of overdevelopment in this part of the conservation area, particularly as the two recently refused applicants have both lodged appeals against the decisions.

The Portobello Conservation Area Character Appraisal states that over-development has occurred in back gardens as well as some over-building in back lanes and that careful attention needs to be paid to such developments in the future if the character of the conservation area is to be both preserved and protected.

The creation of a new street presents several serious traffic and safety issues. The lane is very narrow, with a tight right angled bend at the top. There are no pavements down either side. Figure 6 in the design statement seems to indicate how a fire engine could access the site but this is hard to believe as refuse lorries cannot negotiate the bend and at present rubbish bins have to be gathered together at the entrance to the lane on uplift days.

There is a car repair business at the foot of the lane and a children’s nursery right at the bend in the lane. The nursery has 110 places with permission for 75 children to be present at a time. Although there is access to the nursery by means of a narrow vennel from the High Street, double and triple buggies use the rear access along the lane as do cars dropping children off at the nursery. If permission was to be granted for yet another house in this lane then this complex mix of traffic and safety problems would only be increased. The corner of the new house at the top of the lane, right at the bend, has already been damaged by vehicles struggling to negotiate the tight corner.

The idea of a hammerhead turning space is both practical and sensible but there is no guarantee that this space would always be available for vehicles to reverse into and then drive back up the lane.

Caithness stone and cedar shingles may be traditional Scottish building materials, but they are not the traditional building materials of the Portobello Conservation Area. As far as is known, Caithness stone has not been used in any other house in the Portobello area.

While the front of the proposed house would present a pitched slate roof to the lane, the rear of the house, with its angular copper clad roof, would be out of character with the design and materials of the surrounding original houses.

Supporting Comments

This proposal is to be welcomed as it allows a family with particular needs to build an accessible home.

Redeveloping commercial premises with a family home would probably reduce traffic in the lane and the introduction of a hammerhead turning would improve what vehicular movement there is.

Windfall housing development on brownfield sites is supported by the Development Plan, and a precedent for residential development on the lane has been set by previously consented schemes.

A family home would be more in keeping with the residential nature of the Conservation Area than the current use of the site.

The scale, form and massing of the proposal are sympathetic to the surroundings and the design meets the requirements of overshadowing, sunlight and privacy.

The proposal is of architectural merit in terms of design, sustainability and materials. A high quality modern design would add to the rich mix of architectural styles that exists within the Conservation Area.

Conclusion

After discussing the proposal a vote was taken, with eight Community Councillors objecting to the application, seven being in favour, while others abstained.

Therefore Portobello Community Council objects to the proposal on the grounds that it represents overdevelopment in this part of the conservation area, it would be contrary to the character of the conservation area, contrary to the Portobello Conservation Area Character Appraisal, the design and the materials are not in keeping with the conservation area, and there are significant traffic and safety issues involved.

Yours sincerely,

John M. Stewart,
Chair, Portobello Community Council.