| PLANNING APPLICATIONS Peebles Civic Society – Responses to Planning Applications
September 2008.
08/01402/FUL
Eildon Housing Association
Erection of 37 extra care apartments and 22 general needs apartments with associated car parking, landscaping, boundary walls and fences.
Scottish Borders Council Yard George Street, Peebles.
We object to this application as we have a number of concerns about details and we hope that our suggestions will be noted.
1 The buildings are generally higher than the surrounding houses and therefore the complex will stand out in its surroundings. The four - storey part is close to Dovecot Road and will be seen against the skyline on account of its height. Whilst we welcome the general modern aesthetic approach to the design we are concerned about the choice of colours of the materials as these will have a major contribution to the character of the complex. It is most important that the context of the surroundings to the development is respected.
· The materials of the surrounding buildings are muted buff sandstone or dry dash render with dark roof tiling with earth based colours. We feel that the white limestone chip on white dry dash render will be too bright and obtrusive and totally inappropriate to this part of the town.
· No colour is stated for the Lignacite Facing Masonry and we suggest that this matches the buff sandstone of the surrounding buildings.
· No colour is stated for the two coloured rendered finishes and the curtain walling spandrel panels. To give some contrast we suggest that warm earth colours are used without too dominant a colour such as the burnt or raw umbers and siennas in conjunction with our suggestions for the main wall colours. These could give a richness and go with the proposed dark brown curtain walling and windows.
· The colour of the aluminium roofing has not been stated. This will be seen from a distance and therefore a colour finish rather than a plain aluminium is important to reduce its shine and resulting visual impact.
· Rainwater goods should match the roof colour and down pipes the background wall colour.
2 We are concerned that the stormwater detention pond/basin might be a hazard to children in the area.
3 There is no indication of the landscaping of the area outwith the fence on the riverside. We welcome the tree planting and hope that this area will become a useful open space. This development will greatly enhance the appearance of the riverside.
08/01415/FUL
Mrs Burgess
Replacement windows
Ingleside 31 High Street, Peebles
No objection.
We draw the applicant’s attention to the new Replacement Windows Guidelines August 2008 Section 2.8 figures 11 and 12 and the note requiring the side frames to be recessed into the original sash boxes fitted into checks behind the surrounds to the windows. This is a most important feature of replacing sash and case windows.
08/01377/FUL
Mr Scott Mulligan
Replacement windows and installation of solar panel
5 Tweed Avenue, Peebles
no objection
We regret the proposal to replace original timber windows in this street as most houses here still retain the original windows and maintain the original architectural character of these houses.
We draw the applicant’s attention to the new Replacement Windows Guidelines August 2008 Section 2.8 figures 11 and 12 and the note requiring the side frames to be recessed into the original sash boxes fitted into checks behind the surrounds to the windows. This is a most important feature of replacing sash and case windows.
The proposed window head and cill sections are deeper than suggested in the guidance notes.
08/01432/FUL
Carol Mott
Replacement windows, formation of French door, erection of garden shed and boundary fence.
1 Buchan Gardens, Peebles
We object to replacement window part of this proposal.
The replacement windows are casement windows do not match the pattern of the original sash and case windows. The frame detail is different and sections are heavier and therefore do not comply with the Council’s policy on replacement windows.
This property is part of a small complex of similar houses each with their original uPVC sash windows with slim sections and stepped sashes remaining. It is regrettable that this proposal will undermine the cohesive character of this group of houses.
Planning Response Land West of Rosedean, 1 Venlaw Quarry Road, Peebles
08/01504/FUL
DW & Mrs Cockburn
Erection of dwelinghouse and internal garage
Land West of Rosedean, 1 Venlaw Quarry Road, Peebles
We note that the property is to be sited in the grounds of a Grade B Listed Building but there is no accompanying Listed Building consent application. Access to the site is through the boundary wall of the listed building’s curtilage and involves the demolition of a masonry boundary wall and part of the well established mature hedge that forms a significant feature to the street. We therefore consider that a Listed Building Consent is required as the proposal does not meet the criteria (a) in paragraph 2.4 Exemptions From Listed Building Consent contained in the historic Scotland Memorandum of Guidance on Listed Buildings and conservation Areas 1998.
We object to this application.
Policy BE1 – Listed Buildings.
We are concerned about erecting new buildings in the gardens of mansions as the extent of the site as well as the gardens immediately surrounding the mansions contribute greatly to the character of their setting.
The proposed new building is to be three storeys high, set high on the site and will eventually be light in colour as the timber cladding weathers. As a structure on three storeys it will compete with the main house and will be prominent in the garden and therefore affect the siting of the main house. This policy demands a high quality of design and this by nature of its verticality, height and the large full height bay window over three storeys, it does not respect the original structure, the setting of the garden site and the broader landscape of the base of Venlaw Hill.
Policy G7 - Infill developments. We do not consider that the proposal meets 4 out of the 7 the criteria of this policy. We consider that, due to the size and form of the building being on three storeys set high on the site, it will not meet criteria 3 insofar that it will detract from the character and amenity of the surrounding area and criteria 5 that it does not respect the scale, form, design, materials of its surroundings.
The large bay window on three storeys and the first floor balcony will permit considerable overlooking of the properties downhill and this will constitute an intrusion to their privacy and therefore would not meet criteria 7.
The proposed steep drive leading up to the top of the site from Venlaw Quarry Road and the need to form a parking bay along the road frontage involves the demolition of part of the boundary wall to the Grade B listed building Redbraes. We do not therefore consider that the proposed access is compatible with the need to maintain the character of the curtilage of the Grade B Listed Building and thereby cannot meet criteria 6.
Policy H2 – Protection of Residential Amenity. We do not consider that this development meets requirement 2 (a) and (c) of this policy as the building, by nature of its height and overlooking of its neighbours, will not fit in with the building form of the adjacent houses along the uphill side of the road. The other houses are long and low predominantly single storey with a base well integrated into the landscape and are well screened by vegetation. To integrate the three storey building into the landscape will be very difficult and will take a long time to achieve.
Townscape Setting. The light three storey building with its roof some 15 metres above the Venlaw Quarry Road will be seen from the Edinburgh Road, East Station Car park area. At night the large three storey bay window will be very visible even from a long distance. The Station Bank flats are set against the backdrop of dense woodland of the lower slopes of Venlaw Hill. This is an important characteristic of their integration onto the landscape. To upset this by introducing a large high and light coloured structure will undermine the pleasant landscape character that is now well established. It must be remembered that part of the tree cover on this part of Venlaw is deciduous and in winter the buildings on the hillside will more visible.
Policy G1 – Quality Standards for New Development. This policy sets out demands for a high quality of design for new buildings. For the reasons stated above we consider that the proposal fall short of criteria 1,2,6,8,12, and13.
Policy NE4 – Trees, woodlands and Hedgerows. The proposed development will involve the removal of a considerable length of mature hedging that is part of the curtilage of the Grade B listed main house. There will be a new retaining wall to support the hillside for the new parking bay and this will greatly impact on the visual character of this side of the road.
Access and drainage. We understand that there is a planning restriction placed on further development along this road on grounds of traffic generation. The road is at its narrowest at the boundary of this site. Vehicle access for ground engineering works and then the construction of the house will cause a problem for householders, council vehicles and the emergency services over a considerable period of time. We are also concerned about the safety of such a steep drive exiting onto the road at this point especially in winter. There is also a risk of stormwater runoff from the considerable area of tarmac parking and driveway disgorging onto and across the public road below.
G.J.Bakker Peebles Civic Society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This site is hosted by Online Borders
 |
