Venue: Council Chamber
Contact: Lisa Young Email: lisa.young@gosport.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies for non-attendance To receive apologies for non attendance. Minutes: An apology for inability to attend the meeting was received from Councillor Chegwyn. |
|
Declarations of Interest All Members are required to disclose at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter, any disclosable pecuniary interest or personal interest in any item(s) being considered at this meeting.
Minutes: There were none. |
|
Minutes of the meeting held on 5 June 2024 PDF 258 KB To sign as a true and correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 5 June 2024.
Minutes: RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 June 2024 be signed as a true and correct record. |
|
Deputations - Standing Order 3.4 (NOTE: The Board is required to receive a deputation(s) on a matter which is before the meeting of the Board provided that notice of the intended deputation and its object shall have been received by the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon on Monday 22 July 2024. The total time for deputations in favour and against a proposal shall not exceed 10 minutes).
Minutes: A deputation was received on item 24/00014/FULL – Land adjacent 90 Green Crescent |
|
Public Questions - Standing Order 3.5 (NOTE: The Board is required to allow a total of 15 minutes for questions from Members of the public on matters within the terms of reference of the Board provided that notice of such Question(s) shall have been submitted to the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon on Monday 22 July 2024).
Minutes: There were none. |
|
Report of the Development Manager PDF 259 KB To consider the report of the Development Manager. Additional documents: Minutes: Consideration was given to a report of the Development Manager.
24/00014/FULL - ERECTION OF 2NO. DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED EXTERNAL WORKS AND ACCESS (ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL TO PLANNING PERMISSION 19/00235/FULL) (as amended by plans received 28.03.24 and 01.07.24) Land Adjacent 90 Green Crescent Gosport Hampshire PO13 0DS
Consideration was given to a report of the Development Manager.
24/00014/FULL - ERECTION OF 2NO. DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED EXTERNAL WORKS AND ACCESS (ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL TO PLANNING PERMISSION 19/00235/FULL) (as amended by plans received 28.03.24 and 01.07.24) Land Adjacent 90 Green Crescent Gosport Hampshire PO13 0DS
The Board was advised that an additional representation had been received, The issues raised were · Highway safety of pedestrians, as proposals breach technical guidance requirements and parking supplementary planning document. · Slow speeds do not eliminate collisions or potential fatalities. · wall at number 90 obscures the view of both drivers and pedestrians until they are only inches apart · understand the responsibility for this decision to approve this access lays solely with Gosport Borough Council.
In addition, the recommendation indicated that it was subject to mitigation for the impacts on the water environment (nitrates), but after the ‘and’ it should also include mitigation for recreational disturbance, which whilst dealt with under the previous permission needs to be secured, as noted in paragraph 7 of the report.
The recommendation is for approval subject to conditions and securing of mitigation.
A deputation was received from Mr Batten, advising the Board the following.
I have no objection to houses being built but please look at Point A on the diagram to help explain my safety concerns. The splay lines demonstrate no forward visibility upon exit at Point B the blind spot. Pedestrians approaching from the south are in danger - they cannot be seen! Highways have acknowledged this fact in correspondence that the high wall at no 90 impacts on visibility, but have never visited site to fully assess safety. Currently vehicles reverse slowly, at an angle so it marginally aids inter-visibility. Forward exit changes this arrangement, with driver’s positions now so very close to the wall they are unable to predict hazards.
Pedestrians, especially a child will not be seen running out they are unsighted – the danger is obvious here! Citing low speed and volume as mitigation doesn’t withstand scrutiny if a driver has no forward visibility there is no guarantee they will stop in time! The existing situation is flawed our brick wall has been demolished once. Why increase risk by adding extra vehicles? This current situation could never be described as safe, its simply being managed by two neighbours with numerous near misses over the years. There are plenty of low speed fatal accidents on driveways due to visibility issues. Is it prudent to make a bad situation worse when visibility is compromised? Should we continue to rely on good luck to keep pedestrians safe? The width available for the driveway is so narrow the vehicle tracking appears to collide with the safety barrier. Can this safety feature be built leaving ... view the full minutes text for item 14. |
|
Minutes: Consideration was given to a report of the Head of Environmental Health detailing a request from Hackney Carriage Proprietors seeking an increase in fares.
The Board was advised that a request had been received from the trade in the form of a petition, and that there had been 21 others had replied to the consultation. All but one supported the increase of 30p on the pull off charge, and a request to change the + 50% charge to start at 23:30.
Members recognised that costs had increased since the last increase two years ago and that it seemed a reasonable request. The Board were undecided as to whether it was felt bringing the 50% increase charge forward was acceptable but recognised this would impact those aiming for the last ferry.
Members were advised that all vehicles would be calibrated to the same charge but less could be charged.
RESOLVED: That there be an a) Increase of 20-30pence at the end of a fare. (The reality is that this would be achieved by +30 pence on the pull off charge). and a b) Change the start +50% charging period time from midnight to 23:30.
|