Agenda item

Four x 2 storey semi-detached dwellings with associated amenity space, parking and 4 x vehicular crossovers.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to amendment to the landscaping condition relating to the use of carbon absorbing trees.

Officers introduced the report and addendum, highlighting that Planning permission had been refused in November 2020 for a redevelopment  scheme to provide four terraced dwellings on the site (ref. 13305/APP/2020/2670). This application sought to address the three reasons for refusal relating to the impact on the character and appearance of the area, the impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents and impact of the proposed landscaping scheme on

site.

Officers considered that the reasons for refusal had, on balance, been addressed, with the new scheme successfully breaking the bulk and scale of development on the site with a revised design which responds to its context. The new scheme also changed the relationship to near neighbours and now

retained a 45-degree angle to windows. The new scheme also proposed a markedly different landscaping scheme to the front. On this basis, the application was recommended for approval.

By way of written submission, a petitioner addressed the Committee in objection to the application. Key points included:

·         The petitioner and their neighbours were concerned that the application was recommended for approval.

·         Paragraph 7.08 of the report stated that the new building was nearly 2m below No 21 The Avenue. From a detailed ground survey, prepared for the first proposal circa 2001, it showed that the ground level around No 21 was 67.76 AOD and the level in the grounds of No 25, near the western boundary, was 66.38 AOD. Thus, the level difference was 1.38m, which was substantially less than the 2.0m stated in the report.

·         From drawing no 5802 A100, the proposed development still appeared to cross the 45-degree line. Based on the information above, it was possible that the flat roof extension of the ground floor could be higher than the top of the fence between No 21 and 25, and further consideration should be given to the relationship between No 21 The Avenue and the proposed new development.

The agent on behalf of the application addressed the Committee. Key points included:

·         The design of the new proposal was congruent with the other buildings in the road and the overall street scene.

·         Depth had been reduced, while elevations versus ground level would have a negligible impact on neighbouring properties.

·         The proposal addressed the prior concerns of the Committee and officers, and the previous reasons for refusal.

·         The proposal would provide much needed family homes within the area.

Officers responded to points made by the petitioner. Officers confirmed that drawing no 5802 A100 had been revised to ensure compliance with the 45-degree line, by reducing the depth of the proposed buildings on site. Regarding the proposed levels on site and the perceived inaccuracies, Officers confirmed that whilst the level change was about 1.4m from ground level to ground level, the drop from cill height to cill height was much more generous, at almost 2m. This was shown on the slides to Committee in detail. Officers also confirmed the distance between flank walls, and the distance between No.21 and the new rear projection, and stated that, on balance,  the overall impact on neighbouring properties was deemed acceptable.

The Committee supported the officers recommendation, though suggested that condition 7, landscaping, be amended to mandate the planting of carbon absorbing trees.

The officer’s recommendation, inclusive of the amendment to condition 7, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to amendment to the landscaping condition relating to the use of carbon absorbing trees.*

*Councillor Kauffman was not present for the entirety of the presentation, and therefore did not take part in discussion or the vote on the item.