Agenda item

Erection of a three storey building to create 9 x 3-bed self-contained flats

with car parking within basement, with associated parking and landscaping, installation of vehicular crossover to front and detached summerhouse to rear, involving demolition of existing houses (Resubmission).

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED – That the application be approved.

Officers introduced the report and provided an overview of the application. Planning permission was sought for the erection of a three storey building to create nine x 3-bed self-contained flats with car parking within basement, with associated parking and landscaping, installation of vehicular crossover to front and detached summerhouse to rear, involving demolition of existing houses. This was a resubmission. Officers highlighted the addendum and made a recommendation for refusal.

A petitioner spoke in objection of the application and submitted that the development would adversely impact the character of the area due to its out of character, overbearing and intrusive nature. The development would be significantly larger than the neighbouring buildings and would create a visually dominant and intrusive structure affecting neighbouring gardens and patio space. The petitioner urged the Committee to undertake a site visit to understand the impacts of this development. The petitioner read a statement from the residents which indicated that the report and amended plans did not mitigate the concerns raised. The petitioner referred to the appeal decision in 9 February in which it was stated that the main issue was the unacceptable effects on the living conditions of the occupants of neighbouring residential properties, with reference to being over bearing and visually intrusive.  The petitioner also identified what provisions of the UDP would be compromised. In light of the large potential impact, the petitioner asked for the decision to be deferred pending a site visit.

The agent addressed the Committee and highlighted the changes made which influenced officers to make a recommendation for approval. The application was in line with all policy and  guidance. This was the third application, and the applicant/agent had done their best to address previous issues for refusal. The impact on other property was confirmed by the inspector as being acceptable. This type of development had already been accepted by the inspector who endorsed the visual impact and design. The gent quotes parts of the inspector’s reasoning to support his arguments. The agent submitted that the application exceeded all planning requirements and all the technical aspects of the proposal continued to be addressed. The agent asked for the application to be approved given the significant changes made.

The Chairman directed Members attention to the appeal decision which gave one ground to consider. He informed the Committee that the applicant was correct, with the exception to the impact on number 36, the appeal inspector was happy with all other matters.

Members noted the changes made and considered that the applicant had addressed the issues regarding overbearing by reducing the building to two storey. It was considered that significant changes had been made.  However, some Members still considered that there was an overbearing issue and it would have been advisable to take it back a metre or so as it was still close. Members questioned the height and the windows on the site. Officers acknowledged Members ‘concerns but commented that they could not see any issues with the windows on this proposal.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, there were seven votes for and one abstention.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved, subject to the changes in the addendum.