Construction of 7 Dwellings and 1 Bungalow with associated access and parking.
The Chief Planning Officer outlined the application in detail for the construction of 7 dwellings and 1 bungalow with associated access and parking.
The Chief Planning Officer went through the planning history regarding this site which was on pages 33-34 of the report and also the relevant appeals and decisions which were on pages 37-38 of the report.
The proposed application was for a scheme of seven houses and a bungalow. The houses essentially remained as per the scheme for 7 houses allowed on appeal. The differences from the allowed scheme were the change to the driveway to the house on plot 4 and the proposal for a bungalow with two parking spaces on land previously shown as a landscaped amenity area. The Chief Planning Officer reminded Members that following the appeal decision they had to focus consideration purely on the changes from the scheme allowed on appeal and not re-consider issues already accepted by the Inspector.
With the agreement of the Committee, Councillor Stamp addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor and raised the following concerns:
The Chief Planning Officer, at the request of the Chairperson, reiterated that any decision that this Council made could be challenged. Whether that be a refusal or approval with conditions, the decision could be subject to an appeal to be decided by an independent body, known as the Planning Inspectorate, on behalf of the Secretary of State.
Costs could be awarded against either side if it was deemed that either side had behaved unreasonably, for instance with regards to the Council, it could be that the decision was deemed as unreasonable.
The Chief Planning Officer again reminded Members that following the appeal decision they had to focus consideration purely on the changes from the scheme allowed on appeal and not re-consider issues already accepted by the Inspector.
The Committee discussed the planning application noting points raised by the Ward Councillor.
The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that the scheme for seven dwellings granted at appeal, without the bungalow, could start construction.
Members considered that although there was a need for bungalows for the elderly and disabled, having an extra dwelling constructed on the amenity space on the site, caused concern.
The Chief Planning Officer confirmed that the Inspector did not refuse previous applications on grounds of overlooking, but on the grounds of the number of dwellings and scale created a cramped development.
Refused due to the cramped development, final wording to be agreed with the Chairperson, Vice Chairperson and Opposition Spokespersons.