The latest Planning approvals, refusals and appeals.n SandysP0378/12 BALL Mr. Vic(Received: 21 Nov, 2012) (Addn Info: 6 February 2013)Black Bay Beach, North Road, SandysProposed Seasonal Recreation Facility - (Relative Proximity to Listed Building Sites)Planner: George ShakirRecommend approvalConditions- Planning Permission - Building Permit - General - Landscaping - Proposed - OtherS0044/12 EMANATE TRUST(Received: 4 Dec, 2012) (Revised: 14 March 2013)24 Bob’s Valley Lane, SandysProposed One Additional Lot and Grant of Right of Way (Attached House Development).Planner: Planning ConsultantRecommend approvalConditionsPlanning Permission - FinalSub Divisionn PembrokeS0001/13 RAMADHIN SMITH / ROSE MARY GROVES(Received: 4 Jan, 2013)6 Richmond Road, Pembroke15 Rosemont Avenue, PembrokeProposed Boundary Adjustment.Planner: Maceo DillRecommend approvalConditionsPlanning Permission - FinalSub Divisionn DevonshireP0370/12 POWELL Mr. Roger(Received: 9 Nov, 2012)16 Melville Road, DevonshireProposed New Driveway and Parking to Existing Lower Apartment.Planner: Maceo DillRecommend approvalConditions- Planning Permission - Building Permit - General - ParkingP0423/12 SEYMOUR Ms. C.(Received: 21 Dec, 2012)9 Melville Road, DevonshireProposed Second Storey to Create New Bedroom, Bath and Laundry.Planner: Maceo DillRecommend approvalConditions- Planning Permission - Building Permit - GeneralThe following requests for RENEWAL of planning permission are recommended for approval by the DevelopmentApplications Board. All planning conditions pertaining to the original planning permission still apply.n City of HamiltonP0277/10 BERMUDA IMPORT AND EXPORT CO.(Received: 15 Jun, 2010) (Revised: 6 January 2011)64 Dundonald Street, City of HamiltonProposed Demolition of Existing Building and Construction of New 3 Storey plus basement Warehouse and Office Building.Planner: George ShakirApprovals & refusals1. VT CONSTRUCTION,Proposed New Four Dwelling Units with 9ft High (Maximum Height) Retaining Wall.P0276/12 Type: Final Decision: ApprovePlanner: Cory BrownDiscussion: The technical officer presented the application details to the Board with a recommendation of approval. It was noted that property was within a Cave Protection Area requiring use of septic tank versus cess pits and the standard cave protection condition was also applied. The Section 34 Area on the subject property was noted and it was indicated that the Section 34 area restricted any development from occurring within the identified area. It was noted that with exception of the retaining walls in the setback, with neighbor’s acknowledgement obtained, the proposal is compliant with planning policies. It was noted that a borehole testing condition was installed so caves could be tested for in advance of any development and that this information will be provided with an application for a building permit. The Board asked various clarification questions which were addressed by the technical officer.The Board RESOLVED:To approve the application, as received 6 August, 2012 and revised 8 March 2013 subject to the following condition(s):1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 2 (two) years from the date of this permission.2. For the avoidance of doubt the consent hereby granted is for planning permission only. Prior to the commencement of building operations a separate application for a building permit must be made and approved.3. Given the Cave Protection Area zoning of the site and the existence of caves in the vicinity, borehole testing (or an alternative method agreed in advance with the Department of Planning) to determine the existence of any caves or voids will be required in areas where the proposed excavation exceeds 5 feet below existing grade, inclusive of soil and rock. All test boreholes must be drilled to a minimum depth of 21 feet deeper than the proposed excavation depth and must be located no more than 20 feet apart. A submission containing details of the borehole testing, including an excavation plan of the area that will be subject to testing, all borehole locations and drill depths proposed, as well as the borehole diameter must be submitted to the Department of Planning, for the review and approval of the Department of Conservation Services, prior to the submission of a building permit application. The results of the borehole testing in the form of a Borehole Survey Report must be filed with the Department of Planning for circulation to the Department of Conservation Services. A copy of the written approval of the Borehole Survey Report issued by the Department of Conservation Services must be provided with the building permit application. If borehole testing reveals the presence of voids or caves then the approved proposal must be revised to ensure that no voids or caves are impacted.4. If during construction a previously undetected cave is discovered, the applicant shall cease all construction operations and immediately contact the Department of Planning to re-evaluate building options and agree on a suitable course of action. Construction operations shall not recommence until the approved option has been agreed in writing.5. In the interest of visual amenity, the hereby approved boundary walls (north, south, west) shall be faced with Bermuda stone or rendered and finished to give the appearance of Bermuda stone, and completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion and Occupancy.6. In the interest of visual amenity, there shall be no deposition or storage of excavated material on site and all excess unused material shall be removed from the site during the course of building operations and prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion and Occupancy.7. The communal garbage storage area, as shown on the approved plans, shall be established in accordance with Policy DSN.21, Chapter 8 of the Bermuda Plan 2008 Planning Statement, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion and Occupancy.8. In order to avoid the discharge of surface water onto the estate road, public road other public/private property, provision shall be made for the control and disposal of storm water within the curtilage of the application site. Such measures shall be provided prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion and Occupancy9. In the interests of visual amenity, the entire site subject of this application shall be landscaped in accordance with the hereby approved plans prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion and Occupancy. Any trees or shrubs shown on approved plans which are removed, which die or which become seriously diseased or damaged shall be replaced by trees and shrubs of similar size and species to those originally required to be planted.10.The private outdoor living space shown on the hereby approved plans shall be established for use in accordance with Policies DSN.16 and DSN.17, Chapter 8, of the Bermuda Plan 2008 Planning Statement, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion and Occupancy.11.Parking and maneuvering space for 4 cars and 4 cycles shall be established for use in accordance with Policies TPT.20 and TPT.25.12.The submission of a building permit Application shall include all details associated with the septic tank which shall be a two compartment tank with treated effluent disposal via a sand filter.Advice Note:The Board wishes to advise that the Environmental Engineer expressed someconcern regarding the extent of rainwater to be collected for use by the inhabitants and recommended that a well be considered for the site to alleviate the dependency on water truck deliveries should the need become necessary, which would require the approval of water rights application prior to any well or drainage borehole beinginstalled on the site.2. DECOUTO, Mr. Jesse23 Harbour Road, PagetProposed Addition of New Jetty with Floating Dock and Access Ramp Way.P0289/12 Type: Final Decision: ApprovePlanner: Victoria CaroloDiscussion: The technical officer presented the application details to the Board with a recommendation of approval. The Board sought clarification on the reasoning behind theoverall length of the dock structure and the technical officer confirmed that due to the existence of the rock shelf along the foreshore area, the combination of structures (jetty/ramp/floating dock) had to be designed totaling 40 feet long in order to gain a depth of 3 feet of water at low tide. The Board also queried the engineering requirements for the structure and whether it could withstand the wave inundation levels indicated in the Board Report (from Smith Warner).It was noted that any required engineering details would be provided with the Building Permit application. The Board queried the extent/design of the jetty portion of the structure above sea level at high tide and whether the ramp portion was appropriately designed to accommodate the 3 foot seal level change from low to high tide. The technical officer indicated that the ramp has a wheel/rolling mechanism that will move in accordance with changes in sea levels and this will adjust the ramp angle as needed. The Board queried the details of the anchoring system and whether the design was appropriate.The Board RESOLVED:To approve the application, as received 17 August, 2012 and revised 21 January 2013 subject to the following condition(s):1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 2 (two) years from the date of permission.2. For the avoidance of doubt the consent hereby granted is for planning permissiononly. Prior to the commencement of building operations a separate application for a building permit must be made and approved.3. A Construction Methodology Plan containing details of delineation of any required staging and storage areas and the proposed mitigation measures for potential construction overspill into the waters of Hamilton Harbour shall be submitted to the Department of Planning for review and approval prior to the submission of a building permit application. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall reach an agreement with the Ministry of Public Works regarding the leasing of the foreshore area whereencroachments are proposed.3. GILLETT, Mrs. Deborah10 Wild Wood Court, Southampton8 Wild Wood Court, SouthamptonProposed Internal Conversion to Create Fourth (4th) and Fifth (5th) Dwelling Units.P0314/12 Type: Final Decision: RefusePlanner: George ShakirDiscussion: The technical officer presented the application details to the Board with a recommendation of refusal. The Board was informed that the application exceeded the allowable density and therefore the Board did not have the discretion to approve the proposal.They were also informed that the proposed communal open space was non-compliant with planning policy as it was partially located in the required 15 foot setback to the Southern and western lot line when it should be located fully within the development area. Additionally the communal open space was located directly adjacent to the private amenity space for one of the proposed units, therefore having a detrimental impact to the privacy of the unit.The Board resolved to refuse the application.The Board RESOLVED:To refuse the application, as received 10 September, 2012 for the following reason(s):1. The application does not comply with policy RSD.3 (e), Chapter 26 of the 2008 Bermuda Plan Planning Statement. The lot is only allowed a maximum of three (3) dwelling units and six (5) are proposed, resulting in a density that exceeds policy maximums for Residential 1 zoning.2. The application does not comply with policy DSN.20 (c) and (d) of the 2008 Bermuda Plan Planning Statement. A significant portion of the Communal Open Space is located within the 15 foot required setback to the southern and western lot line and a portion of the proposed communal open space is directly adjacent to the private amenity space for one of the proposed units, therefore having a detrimental impact on the privacy of the neighboring property and providing inadequate privacy for the Private Outdoor Space of the proposed units.