Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation

List Comments

Search for Comments

Order By
in order

9 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Princess di Sirignano 01 Feb 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 514
The reason being that once permissions are granted, the developers become a 'law unto themselves' and there is no way to control what actually transpires especially on large sites. Even if a developer submits an Construction Method Statement that the Planners accept, the developer is under no obligation to abide by it, in fact I have seen the opposite performed and there are no enforcements. Noise and Nuisance seem to be the only department that has any real enforcement powers. The Considerate
Ladbroke Association (Sophia L… 31 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 360
18. We are also concerned that no reference is made in either paragraph 34.3.75 or CL7 to the importance of monitoring, especially of noise levels. The Council must be in a position to make it a condition for basement developments that there should be 24-hour recorded monitoring of noise levels. Without this, it would be much harder for the Council to impose orders under pollution legislation where this becomes necessary. Moreover, the very existence of monitoring is likely to encourage contract
The Markham Square Association… 31 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 433
Paragraph 2.7 Box 1 Paras 34.3.74, 34.3.75 and 34.3.76 We agree with these paragraphs. Although outside the scope of this policy document, the Council should be aware of the inadequacies of the party walls legislation in its application to basements.
Miss Arbuthnot 31 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 414
One of my concerns is that many of these basements are being constructed by foreign owners and their agents who may not have the same regard for boundaries and so on as we might have. In Edith Grove, for instance, the basements currently under construction at number 2 appear to have gone underneath the road. It is not long since our road was resurfaced, but it has been completely broken up, and I have already had one puncture as a result but would not be surprised if that is repeated. Often thes
Bell Cornwell (Tracey Rust) 31 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 306
Paragraph 34.3.75 & Policy CL7j The three year rule of planning permissions renders meaningless any attempt to assess cumulative impact in respect of noise, dust, air quality and vibration as it is not possible to predict at application stage what other works might be taking place at the time at which the approval itself might be implemented within the terms of its own condition 1 time limit. This should remain as existing, by the imposition of a condition attached to a grant of planning permis
Tim Nodder 31 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 381
The limits on noise of construction should be established as part of the planning application; noise from generators should be included in this, together with air quality. Measuring equipment for noise and air quality should be prescribed and monitored. This is necessary in small projects as well as large. Where the site is surrounded by 3 to 5 storey terraces construction noise builds up and carries a considerable way. It is not just the immediate neighbours who are affected; consultation shou
Guy Mayers 28 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 63
4 Your draft policy para 34.3.75 simply says "Appropriate approval" relating to noise and dust. It should contain more, such as "The applicant must provide a fully working 24/7 noise meter installed and operational prior to any construction work starting which can be used to provide evidence of actual levels of construction noise produced". What is the evidence that a 2.3m hoarding is sufficient to prevent dust escaping from a "basement" site? Can 3m hoardings be made mandatory?
Chelsea Society (Paul Lever) 16 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 45
34.3.75. Again this wording is too vague. It should be supplemented by the following additional sentence: "This may mean the imposition of specific restrictions on the levels of noise and vibration which may be caused and the period of the day during which noisy or disruptive work may be undertaken; as well as a limitation on the number of basement developments which can be undertaken simultaneously in the same street or in close proximity to one another."
David Lion 14 Jan 2013

Basement Review Draft policy and other measures for public consultation 2- Review of the Core Strategy 34.3.75

  • Comment ID: 11
I live at 48 Scarsdale Villas and I am concerned about planned basement conversions in my street the disruption to the lives of myself and other neighbours principally for three reasons: · the disruption caused by the building work itself. · the disruption of lorries etc. to and from the site. · potential damage by vibration and subsidence in the same terrace of houses.