Issue - meetings

Issue - meetings

Planning Application No. CB/

Meeting: 28/03/2018 - DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (Item 154)

154 Planning Application No. CB/17/04643/FULL (Dunstable Icknield) pdf icon PDF 616 KB

 

Address:       109 Jeans Way, Dunstable, LU5 4PR

 

Demolition of the existing and replacement of the Scout Hut with a new Scout Hut building.

 

Applicant:     The Scout Association Trust Corporation

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

The Committee had before it a report regarding Planning Application No. CB/17/04643/FULL for the demolition of the existing hut and replacement of the Scout Hut with a new Scout Hut building at 109 Jeans Way, Dunstable, LU5 4PR.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee’s attention was drawn to amended conditions as set out in the Late Sheet.

 

In advance of consideration of the application the Committee received a representation from an objector to the application.  Prior to the representation the Chairman referred to an email and attached document which had been sent to him by the objector with a request that the document be considered.  He advised that the planning officer had circulated the document to all Members of the Committee.

 

A Member sought clarification from the objector regarding her comment that the applicant had refused to engage in discussions with her regarding her concerns.  In response the objector stated that she had emailed a Scout Association representative who had been defensive in his response because, she felt, of her attempts to generate wider interest in the application.  She was aware that other residents had made complaints about the existing Scout building with regard to parking and other issues.  However, only certain properties had been consulted by the Council on the current application and no-one else appeared to be aware of it.  She herself had not received an invitation to a public meeting organised by the Scout Association on the application.  The objector stated that she had attempted further communications with the Scout Association representative setting out her concerns with a request to discuss them but she had not received any response.

 

Another Member referred to the objector’s reference to security in her document and her comment during her representation that she did not wish to discuss the matter in public.  The Member stated that without additional information being provided it was difficult to consider the issue further.  In response the objector stated that she felt unable to provide any information on the basis that, if the application was approved, the potential security issue could be exploited.  She also commented that other people who had seen the application plans had instinctively seen the issue to which she was referring and could not understand why it was not also apparent to the Member and to those who had attended the site inspection.   In response the Member, who had attended the site inspection, stated that the security issue to which she referred was still not apparent to him.

 

In response to a query by the Chairman the objector advised that the security issue did not exist with the current Scout building.  Another Member asked what aspects of the proposed building caused the security concerns.  The objector replied that if she did so she would, in effect, state what the issue was.  She further stated that she had offered (when giving her representation) to discuss the issues privately.  The Chairman informed her that the offer to discuss matters privately caused  ...  view the full minutes text for item 154