Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Cllrs Duncan and Khatra, who were substituted by Cllrs Curling and Oswell.

None.

None.

It was confirmed that items marked Part I would be considered in public, and items marked Part II would be considered in private.

Single storey attached garage to side/rear involving alteration to existing vehicular crossover

Recommendation: Approval

Deferred to allow for further clarification from the Council’s Flood and Water Management Officer.

Officers introduced the report and noted the addendum.

A petitioner spoke in objection to the application, and raised the following points:

·         The petition represented over 50 residents concerned about the proposal.

·         The area was a flood risk zone, and gardens often flooded due to the proximity of the River Fray, sometimes for several days at a time. The petitioner indicated images of recent flooding which had been submitted to the Committee. The new building would further reduce drainage, and impact houses at a lower level.

·         The proposal was in a conservation area, and would not be in keeping with nearby properties. The placement of the extension meant that gaps between houses would be greatly reduced, and look more like terracing.

·         The application sought permission for a double garage, linked to the applicants' business activities and would in fact encourage more cars. Parking was already highly problematic, and a residents permit system was being sought.

In response to a Member question, the proximity of a water as seen from a bird's-eye-view was indicated to the Committee. The petitioner noted that though there was a culvet, water simply lay on top of this and did not flow away.

A Ward councillor spoke in objection to the application, and raised the following points:

·         The application is for a substantial development, and was to occupy an area currently used as a soakaway. This was highly problematic in an area deemed at the highest risk of flooding.

·         Flooding had occurred in the past few days, and due to a high water table did not flow away. The flood risk assessments highlighted a new soakaway at the same level as the river, which would be ineffective in heavy rain.

·         Council policy had previously not supported development in areas where flooding had been less likely.

A Member clarified that the proposed extension was to be built on an area of grass, and that the new soakaway was placed at a lower level. Members discussed concerns relating to flooding evidence, the high water table, and the efficacy of proposed flood alleviation. Members concluded that they lacked sufficient information to make a decision on the application on the basis of concerns regarding flooding.

Members enquired about how the development adhered to conservation guidance, to which officers responded that this was only guidance, and taking all the elements into consideration they had deemed it acceptable. The Chairman noted that there was the precedent for a tall sing-storey extension on the property adjacent, and that there was not agreement for refusal on this ground.

Members concluded that there was insufficient information to address the concerns raised about flooding. It was suggested that the application be deferred to allow for further clarification from the Council’s Flood and Water Management Officer as to how they reached their view that the flood mitigation measures suggested were acceptable.

A motion for deferral was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the item was deferred.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

Raising and enlargement of roof of front part of building to create additional floor space for use as ancillary office to existing retail unit and demolition of existing rear elements

Recommendation: Approval

Application APPROVED as per the officer's recommendation.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. The officer recommendation for approval was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the application was approved.

Single storey rear extension to existing extension

Recommendation: Refusal

Application REFUSED as per the officer's recommendation.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. The officer recommendation for refusal was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the application was refused.

Single storey outbuilding to rear for use as a gym/playroom/storage area

Recommendation: Approval

Application APPROVED as per the officer's recommendation.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. The officer recommendation for approval was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the application was approved.

Erection of two storey, 1-bed end-terrace dwelling with associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover to front

Recommendation: Approval

Application APPROVED as per the officer's recommendation.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. The officer recommendation for approval was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the application was approved.

Change of use of ground floor from travel agents (Use Class A1) to a tattoo studio (Sui Generis)

Recommendation: Approval

Application APPROVED as per the officer's recommendation.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. The officer recommendation for approval was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the application was approved.

Alteration to and part retention of existing outbuilding

Recommendation: Approval

Application APPROVED as per the officer's recommendation.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. The officer recommendation for approval was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote was unanimously agreed.

Resolved:

-       That the application was approved.

Resolved:

1. That the enforcement action as recommended in the officer’s report was agreed.

2. That the Committee resolved to release their decision and the reasons for it outlined in this report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of issuing the formal breach of condition notice to the individual concerned.

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

Resolved:

1. That the enforcement action as recommended in the officer’s report was agreed.

2. That the Committee resolved to release their decision and the reasons for it outlined in this report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of issuing the formal breach of condition notice to the individual concerned.

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

Resolved:

1. That the enforcement action as recommended in the officer’s report was agreed.

2. That the Committee resolved to release their decision and the reasons for it outlined in this report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of issuing the formal breach of condition notice to the individual concerned.

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

Resolved:

1. That the enforcement action as recommended in the officer’s report was agreed.

2. That the Committee resolved to release their decision and the reasons for it outlined in this report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of issuing the formal breach of condition notice to the individual concerned.

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).