Issue - meetings

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of new 1.5 storey building containing 2 dwellings, parking and associated facilities

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of new 1.5 storey building containing 2 dwellings, parking and associated facilities

Officers introduced the item and highlighted that the application was a resubmission following the refusal of a previous application at the Minor Applications Planning Committee in September 2021. It was noted that the application form stated that permission was being sought for 3 dwellings, however the submitted drawings showed proposals for 2 semi-detached dwellings; it was confirmed that officers had assessed the application based on the submitted drawings of 2 semi-detached dwellings.

Officers recommended that the application be refused and had given 7 reasons for refusal in their report. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum whereby the second refusal reason had been amended to include reference to perceive “and actual” loss of privacy for neighbouring residential occupiers. Officers deemed that the attempted revisions made by the applicant since the previous application was refused had not satisfactorily addressed their concerns.

A petition had been received objecting to the application. By way of written submission, the petitioners highlighted their reasons for submitting a petition in objection, including:

• That they were the tenant of the shop at 78 High Street, to the front of the site, as well as the tenant of the flat above.
• There would be an adverse impact on neighbouring residential occupiers as a result of the proposals.
• The development would offer sub-standard accommodation for future occupiers, and
• That there would be an adverse impact on the surrounding Area of Special Local Character.
• They were in agreement with officer’s reasons for recommending refusal of the application.

The Committee agreed that some development was required for the site, particularly the rear of the site which was in disrepair, but indicated that the proposals in front of them were not a suitable form of development.

Members highlighted the unacceptable layout with specific reference to the refuse store arrangements whereby the adjacent occupier would need to walk past their neighbour’s ground floor window to access the refuse store. Officers noted that refusal reason 3, by way of it mentioning a contrived layout, went some way in addressing the concerns around refuse storage arrangements, however officers were happy to amend the reason to include specific reference to refuse arrangements.

The officer’s recommendation, including the discussed amendment, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the application be refused;

2)    That refusal reason 2 be amended as per the addendum; and

3)    That refusal reason 3 be amended to include specific reference to the unacceptable refuse storage arrangements.