9:15 AM, 13th February 2020, About 2 years ago 6
As painful as the planning process is – the council have approved our plans, but scuppered us with the worse possible restriction if we proceed. How they can come to such a conclusion and feel it is a viable solution.
Basically the property is in London (NW10). It is a large Victorian property and we want to divide it up into two flats and a studio. With the London plan in effect and that of the council, we are able to meet all the criteria for the number of bedrooms, flat sizes and studio sizes without much of an issue.
So this all boils down to parking. We have a drive that can squeeze two cars, but if they are normal saloons they do overhang, but this means we have a drop kerb anyway. The property is in a CPZ zone so permits all round. Our plan to meet that of the council plan was to remove the drive and to raise a wall and turn it into something more green. So we do as they want in our plans.
The BIG issue is they have applied the following condition on the approval of the plans:
Occupiers of the residential development, hereby approved, shall not be entitled to a Residents Parking Permit or Visitors Parking Permit to allow the parking of a motor car within the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) operating in the locality within which the development is situated unless the occupier is entitled; to be a holder of a Disabled Persons Badge issued pursuant to Section 21 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 1970. For the lifetime of the development written Document Imaged DocFDN Ref: 19/4390 Page 3 of 4 notification of this restriction shall be included in any licence transfer lease or tenancy agreement in respect of the residential development. For the lifetime of the development a notice, no smaller than 30cm in height and 21cm in width, clearly informing occupants of this restriction shall be displayed within the ground floor communal entrance lobby of each building, in a location and at a height clearly visible to all occupants. On, or after, practical completion but prior to any occupation of the residential development, hereby approved, written notification shall be submitted to the Local Highways Authority confirming the completion of the development and that the above restriction will be imposed on all future occupiers of the residential development.
Reason: In order to ensure that the development does not result in an increased demand for
parking that cannot be safely met within the locality of the site.
How can they put such a restriction if their council plan is to make the accommodation family-friendly? They expect everyone to walk and ride a bike? They want us to reinstate the drop down kerb, but don’t even get a parking space for relinquishing it and paying for it?
But the London plan states and documents they have sent us (CIL Details) they have quoted: The existing house is therefore allowed up to two off-street parking spaces. There is a crossover in place to access the front garden, but the depth of the front garden is too short to accommodate a standard car parking space, leading to cars overhanging the footway of Road when parked within the site. Nevertheless, maximum parking standards are not currently exceeded. This application to extend and convert the property into three flats (1-bed, 2-bed & 3-bed) will increase the parking allowance of the building to 3.5 spaces. With the substandard parking spaces to be removed from the frontage, maximum parking standards would continue to be complied with.
I don’t think I have read it wrong but any ideas on this one appreciated.
Please Log-In OR Become a member to reply to comments or subscribe to new comment notifications.
Previous ArticleCan beneficial ownership be claimed without the paperwork?