Agenda item

Watling

Construction of part two storey front/side/part single storey front/side and single storey rear extensions together with formation of a gable end with dormer to rear and roof light to rear to facilitate additional habitable living accommodation within the roof space and construction of driveway to front - Resubmission of MC/17/0853. 

Discussion:

The Committee was reminded that at its meeting on 20 December 2017, consideration had been given to this planning application and it had been determined that the application be refused.

At the meeting, after the vote had taken place, a member of the public had raised a concern that the adjacent neighbour to the application site was a Councillor who had been sitting in the public gallery during the consideration and determination of the application.

Whilst there was no indication that the Committee had acted improperly in the determination of the application, Members recognised that it was not unreasonable for the public to perceive that the presence of the Councillor may have influenced some Members when determining the planning application.

A number of Members had given an assurance that they had determined the planning application on planning grounds and were not aware that a Councillor’s residence adjoined the application site. It was also noted that the vote to refuse the planning application had been cross party. However, the Committee accepted that there was a need for there to be transparency and therefore requested that the decision notice for this planning application not be issued and the matter be referred to the Council’s Monitoring Officer as the way forward.

As a result, the Monitoring Officer, Chairman of the Planning Committee and Head of Planning had reviewed the matter and agreed that it was appropriate to report the application back to the Committee for re-consideration.

The Committee was advised that in the meantime, no action had been taken to implement the original decision of the Committee from 20 December 2017.

The Committee was advised that in law, a resolution passed at one meeting may be rescinded at a subsequent meeting provided there were no practical obstacles.

The Committee was advised that before it was able to reconsider the planning application, it must first rescind the decision that it took on 20 December 2017 and then reconsider the application afresh.

Members were reminded that they should take appropriate action if they considered that they had a disclosable pecuniary interest or other significant interest in the matter. Any Member with a pecuniary or other significant interest should disclose this and leave the room taking no part in the discussion or vote on the matter. In addition, any Member who considered that they were biased or had pre-determined the matter should also not take part in consideration of this application.

A Member expressed concern that although some Councillors may know the Councillor involved, they had not been aware of her opinion on this planning application when it had been considered on 20 December 2017 and therefore questioned why the Committee’s decision at that time could not stand.

In response, the Planning and Licensing Lawyer advised that as the identity of the adjoining neighbour had only become apparent after the vote had been taken on 20 December 2017, there was no concern as to how the decision had been reached. She recognised that Members of the Committee may naturally be predisposed to reach the same decision that they reached when the application was first considered. However, additional information was available to be reported at this meeting which would enable the Committee to consider the application afresh. She stated that if any Member felt strongly that they would be unable to consider the application afresh, then they would be deemed to have pre-determined the application and should therefore leave the meeting.

Decision:

That the decision of the Planning Committee on 20 December 2017 on planning application MC/17/2951, 3 Nore Close, Darland be rescinded to enable the Committee to consider the application afresh for the reasons stated.

             ___________________________________________

Discussion:

The Head of Planning then outlined the planning application and drew attention to the supplementary agenda advice sheet suggesting that if the Committee was minded to approve the application, proposed condition 2 required amendment to substitute drawing 205-002 Rev 07 for Rev 06.

The Head of Planning outlined the planning application in detail and displayed  new photographs of the street scene and properties with extensions in Nore Close and Leyton Avenue. In addition, he advised the Committee that since the original consideration of the application on 20 December 2017, a revised plan had been received and he outlined the changes which had been made. The Head of Planning also advised that he had held discussions with the applicant concerning other possible amendments to the proposed development but confirmed that the applicant had declined to make such alterations and he explained the reasons why the applicant had reached this decision.

The Committee discussed the planning application in detail noting the revisions reported by the Head of Planning.

Members thanked the Officers for providing the additional photographs as they considered that this had provided a clearer view of the properties in Nore Close than previously displayed.

Some Members expressed concern that although other properties in Nore Close had extensions, this particular proposed development was very prominent and bulky and would have a dominating effect upon the property located at No. 4 Nore Close and was therefore an overdevelopment of the site. Other Members considered the application to be acceptable, although recognised that the dimensions of the extension would provide a very limited access from the front to the rear of the property.

The Head of Planning clarified that the proposal, if approved would result in the conversion to provide 5 bedrooms.

Decision:

Refused on the following ground:

1.    That the proposed extension at the side of the property would result in overdevelopment of the site and have an impact on the street scene and be detrimental to the property at No. 4 Nore Close by virtue of the design and scale of the proposed development.