FORTY objections have been made against controversial plans to develop a residential car park.

As previously reported, revised plans to build six homes in Halliday Close, Cranbourne were submitted by Quadron Investments after its previous application to build eight homes on the land was withdrawn in June.

Residents objected to the previous proposals, saying the development would exacerbate parking problems in the area, and also raised concerns about emergency access.

And they had the same concerns about the revised plans, which has reduced the size of the development by two, consisting of two three-bedroom houses; two one-bedroom flats; and two one-bedroom maisonettes.

Kevin Grant, from Halliday Close, objected to the plans, saying: “My main concern is the parking as we already have a problem in the area as it is and the last thing we need is more cars when there’s nowhere for them to go.

Nicholas Gauden, from Midlane Close, said in his objection: “We are already worried about emergency services getting through and this will add to this worry.”

He said that homeowners in the area are “struggling to sell” because of the uncertainty over the development, adding: “We are the ones who will have to live with this development, when the developer comes from London and will make lots of money and leave.”

Other objections raised concerns about inaccuracies in the application, pointing out that the plans “ignore the standard spacing between maisonettes along Halliday Close and surrounding roads” to allow for sufficient access in and out of each property.

Kim Lewis, from Halliday Close, said: “…the plan view seems to presume access [to our property] is available through our downstairs neighbour’s front garden!”

Dianne Hedger-Mosdell, who owns a property in Cranbourne Lane, said: “The proposed site has been used as a parking area for local residents since the original development was built – removing this historic use will have a detrimental impact on the surrounding roads and will force these residents to park in adjacent areas already unable to cope with the number of vehicles parking there.”

Nine parking spaces would be provided for the new development.

The application states: “There are no formal agreements or arrangements in place for public or private use of the site for car parking. It is understood that any use of the site for car parking over the years has been on an informal and temporary basis. The proposals would, therefore, not result in any loss of car parking for the area.

“The policy-compliant provision of car parking for the new development ensures there will be no additional demand for on-street car parking as a result of the proposals.”

It adds: “The revised proposals have significantly reduced the amount of built form proposed for the site and have drawn much more strongly from the architectural style and detailed design of buildings within the immediate area.”