Agenda item

[NOTE 1: The Planning Officer advised the Committee that one additional letter of objection had been received which mainly reiterated the comments already summarised within the representations section of the report.]

[NOTE 2: The Planning Officer advised the Committee that the applicant would no longer be applying for a CIL self-build exemption so if the application was approved it would be subject to CIL payments.]

[NOTE 3: In accordance with the procedure for public speaking at Planning Committee, Ms Anne Moore attended the meeting and spoke in objection to the application and Mr Russell Hedges spoke in support.]

The Committee considered an application which sought permission to erect a detached 1 ½ storey four-bedroom dwelling on rear garden land of Burley which fronts onto Bagshot Road with access point over amenity land at Garvan and associated landscaping to the west of the cul-de-sac within Ivydene.

Councillor S Hussain, Ward Councillor, commented that he thought that there was a flooding issue at Ivydene that had not been addressed sufficiently in the report; another Councillor noted that there was currently a temporary flood sign displayed on the road. Councillor S Hussain did not support the application.

The Planning Officer commented that the flooding issue had been addressed in paragraph 33 and condition 11 in the report.

Following concerns raised by Members about the overbearing impact on Cherley, the neighbouring property, the Planning Officer commented that this had been addressed in paragraph 21 of the report. The Planning Officer commented that the amended application had addressed the concerns that had been noted on the recent appeal decision. Members thought that concerns regarding the height had been addressed in this new application, but the proximity and spread across the rear boundary of Cherley had not.

Some Members did not think the application satisfied CS21 with regards to how the design compared to other properties in the area. They noted that it was an odd shaped section of land and that it may not be possible to design a satisfactory dwelling for this area that did not impose on the surrounding properties.

It was noted that a large number of representations from residents had been received regarding this application. The Committee queried whether the applicant had access rights over the amenity land to access the development site. The Planning Officer advised that the submitted application had red lined this area, although ownership of the land was not a planning matter and approval of the application did not give any entitlement to this.

Councillor S Hussain proposed and it was duly seconded by Councillor L Lyons, that the application be refused on the grounds that it would have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties and that the design was contrived and not in keeping with the surrounding area.

In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on the motion above.  The votes for and against refusal of the application were recorded as follows.

In favour:                           Cllrs S Ashall, T Aziz,  A J Boote, G Elson, S Hussain, L Lyons , N Martin and L Morales.

                                 TOTAL:  8

Against:                              None

                                 TOTAL:  0

Present but not voting:      Cllr G Chrystie (Chairman).

                                 TOTAL:  1

The application was therefore refused.