Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED:

-        The minutes of the previous meetings held on 24 August, 13 September and 4 October 2016 were deferred.

None.

It was confirmed that all items on the agenda would be heard in public.

Erection of two storey building to provide 4 x 2 bed self-contained flats with associated parking, involving demolition of existing dwelling.

Recommendation: Refusal

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

Part two-storey, part single-storey rear extension, conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include four rear dormers, one rear rooflight and three front rooflights, single-storey front extension and single-storey outbuilding to rear.

Recommendation: Refusal

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

Conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer, four front rooflights and conversion of roof from half-hip to gable end to both sides and single-storey rear extension.

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was deferred.

Conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer, four front rooflights and conversion of roof from half-hip to gable end to both sides, and single storey rear extension.

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the addendum, confirming that reason for refusal 2 should be deleted from the officer's report.

There was a petition in objection to the application, and the lead petitioner addressed the Committee, citing the dominant appearance of the proposal, overdevelopment of the site, concerns regarding parking and emergency services access, loss of privacy for neighbouring dwellings and the detrimental impact on the surrounding area as reasons for their objection.

The applicant then spoke to the Committee confirming there was also a petition in support of the application. The applicant stated that the proposal was for family use, and would not cause a loss of amenity for neighbouring dwellings due to the angle of the dwellings in relation to the application. The applicant stated there would be little impact on the surrounding area and no impact on the street scene as a very similar application had already been approved at No.5 Burlington Close, which was on the opposite side of the road to No.46.

Councillor Jonathan Bianco, a Ward Councillor, addressed the Committee and stated that he would be happier with the application if it was proposed on a more modest level, however, No.5 Burlington Close had a very similar extension.

Members commented that the dwelling at No.5 would have an impact on the determination of the application and confirmed that there was not sufficient information on the site of No.5 and how it would relate to the current application. As a result, the Committee proposed deferring the application so that this information could be provided. The motion was seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was deferred.

Two-storey, three bed, detached dwelling with habitable roofspace, with associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover to front.

Recommendation: Refusal

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

Conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer, two front rooflights and conversion of roof from half-hip to gable end with a new gable end window.

Recommendation: Refusal

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

The application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

First floor side extension, single-storey front infill extension and porch to front involving alterations to elevations.

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was refused.

First floor side extension, single storey front infill extension and porch to front involving alterations to elevations.

Officers introduced the report and Members noted the addendum.

The Committee stated that the site was in a conservation area and that no other properties in the area had the infill that was proposed. Members commented that the infill would take away from the natural symmetry of the buildings and moved the officer's recommendation. This was seconded, and put to a vote with five Members voting in favour, two Members voting against, and one abstention.  

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was refused.

Installation of ground mounted solar panels.

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was refused.

Installation of ground mounted solar panels.

Officers introduced the report, and responding to questioning from the Committee, confirmed that the proposed solar panels would result in the loss of landscaping at the site.

The Committee moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote, unanimously agreed the officer's recommendation.

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was refused.

Installation of mini-roundabout and bus lay-by including re-arranged access and bus shelter.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was approved.

Installation of mini-roundabout and bus lay-by, including re-arranged access and bus shelter.

Officers introduced the report and confirmed the proposal would improve access for buses. Members proposed, seconded and unanimously agreed the officer's recommendation.

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was approved.

Single-storey building to form an outpatients lobby.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was approved.

Single storey building to form an outpatients' lobby.

Officers introduced the report to the Committee and noted the addendum, including comments from Historic England.

The officer's recommendation was proposed, seconded, and unanimously agreed by Councillors upon being put to a vote.

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was approved.

Two-storey, one bed, end of terrace dwelling house.

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was refused.

Two storey, one-bed, end of terrace dwelling.

Officers introduced the report and noted the addendum.

The Committee moved, seconded and unanimously agreed the officer's recommendation.

RESOLVED:

-        That the application was refused.

RESOLVED:

-        That the report was noted.

Councillors noted the report which provided financial information on s106 and s278 agreements in the North Planning Committee area up to 30 June 2016, where the Council has received and holds funds.

RESOLVED:

-        That the report was noted.