KRA PLANNING SUB COMMITTEE REPORT FOR 2005.
SUMMARY OF PLANNING APPLICATION ACTIVITY.
New planning applications decreased by approximately 7% over the previous year.
A summary of activity follows.
1.1 Planning Applications undetermined at beginning of year 17
1.2 New Planning Applications during the year – see 2 below-113
To be decided 130
A summary of activity follows.
1.1 Planning Applications undetermined at beginning of year 17
1.2 New Planning Applications during the year – see 2 below-
To be decided 130
1.3 Applications determined: - see 3 below Approved 78
Refused or superseded 29 107
1.4 Applications undetermined at end of year 23
2. ANALYSIS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR THE YEAR.
Refused or superseded 29 107
1.4 Applications undetermined at end of year 23
2. ANALYSIS OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR THE YEAR.
"Residential" applications decreased by 14 (13%), applications for blocks of flats increased by 2 (50%) and "Commercial" applications increased by 4, (67%).
2.1 RESIDENTIAL
Extensions and conservatories 69
Garages,gates,outbuildings etc 8
Plot splitting- see 5 below- 12
Demolition and replacement 5
Staff flats 3 97
2.2 Blocks of flats- see below 6-
2.3 COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
St Andrews Church (ramp for disabled). 1
Kingswood Golf Club 2
Mitsubishi Sign 1
Garden Farm (horse shelters) 2
The Stores (shutter) 1
Kingswood Court – extension. 1
Telecom masts 2
10
TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW APPLICATIONS IN 2005. 11
2.3 COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL
St Andrews Church (ramp for disabled). 1
Kingswood Golf Club 2
Mitsubishi Sign 1
Garden Farm (horse shelters) 2
The Stores (shutter) 1
Kingswood Court – extension. 1
Telecom masts 2
10
TOTAL NUMBER OF NEW APPLICATIONS IN 2005. 11
3. APPLICATIONS DETERMINED.
Representations made and applications determined are: -
APPLICATIONS KRA KRA NO KRA DETERMINED
Objection Comment Objection
3.1 Approved 10 16 52 78
3.2 Refused 20 3 6 29
-----------------------------------------------------------
3.3 Total 30 19 58 107
============================================
3.4 Percentage refused- 67% 16% 10% 27%
The history of the number of
YEAR Number Percentage of total
2002-
2003-
2004-
2005-10 33%
4. PLOT SPLIT APPLICATIONS.Most plot split applications result in plot sizes that are uncharacteristically small and too close to boundaries and are therefore opposed by the KRA.
The practice of making several applications for one location seems to be getting worse and this conceals true activity in terms of the number of locations involved.
Recent history of the number of plot split applications is: -
YEAR No of plot split applications made. No of locations involved
2002 14 10
2003 8 10
2004 8 7
2005 12 7
5. FLATS.The further development of blocks of flats is not felt compatible with the character of Kingswood and all such applications are opposed by the KRA.
Developers submit multiple applications so that in spite of there being 6 applications during the year, only 3 locations were involved.
APPLICATIONS KRA KRA NO KRA DETERMINED
Objection Comment Objection
3.1 Approved 10 16 52 78
3.2 Refused 20 3 6 29
-
3.3 Total 30 19 58 107
============================================
3.4 Percentage refused-
The history of the number of
YEAR Number Percentage of total
2002-
2003-
2004-
2005-
4. PLOT SPLIT APPLICATIONS.Most plot split applications result in plot sizes that are uncharacteristically small and too close to boundaries and are therefore opposed by the KRA.
The practice of making several applications for one location seems to be getting worse and this conceals true activity in terms of the number of locations involved.
Recent history of the number of plot split applications is: -
YEAR No of plot split applications made. No of locations involved
2002 14 10
2003 8 10
2004 8 7
2005 12 7
5. FLATS.The further development of blocks of flats is not felt compatible with the character of Kingswood and all such applications are opposed by the KRA.
Developers submit multiple applications so that in spite of there being 6 applications during the year, only 3 locations were involved.
6. EXTENSIONS.There were a few cases this year of extensions proposed too close to boundaries. The Borough Local Plan states that the Council will only allow proposals which respect and are compatible with the existing character of the residential area, that maintain the existing visual predominance of tree cover and spacious gardens - and maintain generous spacing between buildings.
The KRA will continue to support this policy and will oppose applications that conflict with it, in the interests of maintaining the current high level of privacy and residential amenity.
7. CERTIFICATES OF LAWFULNESS .Unfortunately there were two cases this year. They both followed the same pattern, where complaints from local residents were seemingly ignored by the Council’s "Enforcement Officers" for so many years that the unwanted activity was eventually deemed to be "lawful".
The Council cannot find the result satisfactory from a planning point of view - yet insufficient resources seem to have been devoted to devising strategies to combat such applications and inadequate help and advice was given to local residents who protest.
The KRA will be reviewing the situation and will issue further comment, probably via our page in "Village Voice".
8. "CONSULTATION".
Following the Audit Commission’s inspection of the Council’s Planning Service, considerable quantities of "consultation" documents have been issued. Much of the response required is simply of ticking boxes to questions the Council themselves have posed and so seem of very little true consultative value. But formerly unreasonable deadlines for other responses have been extended so the KRA will take the opportunity to register genuine comments about aspects of the operation of the Planning Service.
9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.
The fortnightly summaries produced by John Lang keep KRA Committee members promptly and adequately informed about the progress of planning applications and are invaluable in producing the statistics in this memorandum.
Our thanks to John.
10. THIS IS AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF A REPORT ISSUED BY PETER HAWKINS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE KRA COMMITTEE MEETING OF 19 JANUARY 2006.
KRA595
The KRA will continue to support this policy and will oppose applications that conflict with it, in the interests of maintaining the current high level of privacy and residential amenity.
7. CERTIFICATES OF LAWFULNESS .Unfortunately there were two cases this year. They both followed the same pattern, where complaints from local residents were seemingly ignored by the Council’s "Enforcement Officers" for so many years that the unwanted activity was eventually deemed to be "lawful".
The Council cannot find the result satisfactory from a planning point of view -
The KRA will be reviewing the situation and will issue further comment, probably via our page in "Village Voice".
8. "CONSULTATION".
Following the Audit Commission’s inspection of the Council’s Planning Service, considerable quantities of "consultation" documents have been issued. Much of the response required is simply of ticking boxes to questions the Council themselves have posed and so seem of very little true consultative value. But formerly unreasonable deadlines for other responses have been extended so the KRA will take the opportunity to register genuine comments about aspects of the operation of the Planning Service.
9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.
The fortnightly summaries produced by John Lang keep KRA Committee members promptly and adequately informed about the progress of planning applications and are invaluable in producing the statistics in this memorandum.
Our thanks to John.
10. THIS IS AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF A REPORT ISSUED BY PETER HAWKINS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE KRA COMMITTEE MEETING OF 19 JANUARY 2006.
KRA595
Planning in 2008
THE PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE.
To see current planning action click here...