Agenda item

Two storey building with habitable roofspace to create 5 x self-contained flats with associated parking and landscaping and installation of vehicular crossover, involving demolition of existing detached dwelling.

Recommendation : Approval subject to a S106 Agreement.

Two storey building with habitable roofspace to create 5 x self-contained flats with associated parking and landscaping and installation of vehicular crossover, involving demolition of existing detached dwelling.

In introducing the report, officers directed the Committee to note the changes set out in the Addendum sheet circulated at the meeting.

In accordance with the Council’s constitution, two representatives of petitions received in objection to the proposal were invited to address the meeting.

The petitioners raised the following points:

• The proposal was not in accordance with policy
• Need to provide and keep more family homes with adequate space
• Losing family homes and replacing with 5 blocks of flats would not be in keeping with residential homes in the area
• It was not the purpose of policy to allow such conversions, which would not be compatible with the objective of maintaining family spaces
• No similar development of this size existed in the road and failed to protect the impact on the character and amenity of the area
• The proposed development would result in significant loss of residential amenity 
• The planning application provided insufficient parking for 5 families
• The proposed development did not compliment the character of the road
• The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on Nos. 49 and 51a 
• Urged the Committee to refuse the application by virtue of the size bulk and height of the proposal
• This application was a new version of the same previously refused application, therefore should again be refused
• Although the new application partly addressed the issue of light, there had been no change to the detrimental effect on Nos. 49b and 51
• The footprint of the proposed development still exceeded that at No. 49b and 3 storey high
• Concerned that the size and bulk of the scheme would cause movement and impact footings
• Lighting in the living room (where most time was spent during the day) would be severely affected and would be further compounded by the use of dark brickwork
• Concerned about the noise that would be generated from the kitchen, dining room and utility areas, which would be further exacerbated by the use of the communal gardens
• Feared that cars would be parked on the road making access to own drive impossible and additional cars would lead to increased traffic on the road
• Concerned about potential problem of refuse collection, how this would be managed
• The proposed development would impact on drainage, as currently No 51 was having to clear the drains every 6 to 8 weeks, and the proposed hard surfacing would create even more pressure on the drainage system
• Urged the Committee to refuse the application.

The agent/applicant was not present at the meeting.

In response to a query about the right to light and the issue of footings, officers advised that these were civil issues which were outside the Planning Act and that the issue of footings was dealt with under the Party Wall Act. 

Officers advised that previous concerns in relation to overshadowing had been resolved. 

The recommendation was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

Resolved –

a) That the Council enters into a legal agreement with the applicant under  section 106 of the 1990 Town & Country Planning Act (as amended) or other appropriate legislation to secure:

i) Educational facilities contribution of £22,253.

b) That in respect of the application for planning permission, the applicant meets the Council's reasonable costs in preparation of the Statement and any abortive work as a result of the agreement not being completed.

c) That planning officers be authorised to negotiate and agree details of the

proposed Statement.

d) If the Legal Agreement/s have not been finalised before within 6 months of the date of this resolution, delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning, Green Spaces and Culture to refuse planning permission for the following reason:

'The applicant has failed to provide contributions towards the improvement of services and facilities as a consequence of demands created by the proposed development (in respect of capacity enhancements in educational facilities).  The proposal therefore conflicts with Policy R17 of the adopted Local Plan and the Council's Planning Obligations SPG’.

e) That subject to the above, the application be deferred for determination by the Head of Planning Green Spaces and Culture under delegated powers, subject to the completion of the agreement.

f) That if the application is approved, the conditions and informatives in the officer’s report be attached and the changes in the Addendum.