Skip to the record
Beware of cheap imitations.

Council archive · source document

MCU15/0095 & REC15/0022 PM Submissions Object - Petition

of 27

Text shows just the words. Original shows the document exactly as it was published.

Code Objective                   Developer's Assessment             Objectors' Assessment

                                 there considered that 10           The Applicant furthermore provides
                                 spaces is appropriate.             no justification for its derived value of
                                                                    10 other than it is what will fit on the
                                                                    site given its proposed   configuration.


                                                                    Furthermore the Applicant provides
                                                                    no data or objective evidence by way
                                                                    of survey, industry statistics or
                                                                    otherwise   to justify its assessment      of
                                                                    the likely number of users of the
                                                                    service station to refuel vehicles
                                                                    versus to use the retail facility. The
                                                                    number is simply derived to fit with
                                                                    the number configurable on the
                                                                    Property and within the design
                                                                    proposed by the Applicant.


                                                                    It is the Applicant's responsibility to
                                                                    provide a compliant design. the
                                                                    current design is clearly non-
                                                                    compliant and must be rejected.



09 Parking areas are located     09 Complies                        Does not Comply
where they will not unduly        Car parking is located at the     The Applicant states that the car park

 conflict with pedestrians and    front of the building, the most    is located to be "the most suitable
                                  suitable location for a service    location for a service station use"
will not dominate the
                                  station use.                       which is not the requirement but a
 streetscape.
                                                                     function of the proposed design.


                                                                     The Applicant has failed to address
                                                                     the requirement and demonstrate
                                                                     that Parking areas are located where
                                                                     they will not unduly conflict with
                                                                     pedestrians. The Applicant has failed
                                                                     to address the requirement and
                                                                     demonstrate    that parking areas are
                                                                     located where they will not unduly
                                                                     conflict with pedestrians and will not
                                                                     dominate the streetscape.

                                                                     Does not Comply
 011 Accessand egress
                                                                     Given the nature of the development
 points do not impact on the
                                                                     and proximity to the School the
 safety and operations of the



                                                                                                                    22

Used in these records

About this file

File size
9.6 MB (large file)
File type
PDF

No other editions are linked here.

Original file

Log in to download the original file

MCU15_0095 & REC15_0022 PM Submissions Object - Petition.pdf · 9.6 MB (large file)

The download may take up to a minute.

The supporting record

Open full page ↗

Source document

Analyse documents ↗Open full page ↗

My Comparisons

Choose two to four records of the same kind. Drag using a handle or use the “Compare” buttons.

Your selected records are saved in this browser for your account. Results use the filters on the page where you choose “Compare selected”.