Agenda item

To determine the application.

David Rowen presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Ian Gowler, the agent. Mr Gowler explained that it is proposed to demolish the existing dwelling and replace it with a pair of semidetached cottages as the existing cottage has subsidence and would require significant repairs to bring it up to a modern standard. He referred to the presentation screen and pointed out that the photo showing the site and the gap along Chapel Lane that is referred to was previously a large privet hedge which was removed by the applicant to clear the overgrown garden.

Mr Gowler stated that the new pair of houses have been moved along compared to the existing cottage, but overall, it is only 4m wider than the original cottage, therefore, in his view, the gaps in the street scene are still present they are just more balanced each side of the proposed building. He explained that by moving the properties along the windows will no longer overlook the garden of 22 Angoods Lane and the front windows will look onto the front of No.14, however, these windows are already overlooked by the road and footpath link to Angoods Way.

Mr Gowler made the point that no objections have been received from neighbours including No.14 opposite and Chatteris Town Council have supported the application. He explained that this development would provide an additional modern energy efficient small starter home within Chatteris and asked the committee to support the application.

Members asked questions, made comments and received responses as follows:

·       Councillor Benney stated that he has visited the site and there are 16 dwellings in the road and all but three of them are new build properties or replacements. He added that the building is not in a good state of repair and it is leaning and expressed the opinion that if it is not viable to repair it due to costs, it will stay there until it falls down and there are many properties in Fenland which are falling down. Councillor Benney expressed the view that there is a positive development before the committee and there are no objections to the proposal from any consultees. He stated that 13 out of 16 dwellings are fresh dwellings and the street scene has altered which can be seen from the change in bricks. Councillor Benney stated that had the resident at 14 Chapel Lane objected to the proposal then he may have considered the application differently. He expressed the opinion that the building is in a poor state of repair and it would be better for it to be taken down before it falls down and rebuild a new dwelling which is fit for purpose and he will support the application.

·       Councillor Murphy stated that in Chapel Lane all the dwellings are houses on that side of the road and there are bungalows opposite. He added that with regards to consistency, all of the dwellings in the lane are at different angles and it is a narrow road, however, the residents on the road have lived there for some time. Councillor Murphy added that he will support the proposal.

·       Councillor Miscandlon expressed the view that consideration during any construction should be given to the neighbouring properties as it is a small narrow lane and if approved a condition could be added.

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that the house does have a number of cracks in it and it needs to be demolished and rebuilt.

·       Councillor Topgood stated that LP16 (D) is a reason for refusal but, in his opinion, it does not detract from the local area and LP16 B, D, E, H, I and K all support the application and he will also be supporting the proposal.

·       Councillor Skoulding stated that currently the site looks a mess and, in  his view, the design looks fantastic and improves the area and he welcomes the proposal.

·       David Rowen stated that the absence or submission of objections to a proposal is not a material planning consideration, and the application needs to be looked at on its own merits. He added that there is no objection from officers to the principle of demolishing the dwelling and replacing it, but the issue is with the detailed relationship that comes about with the form of the proposal.

Proposed by Councillor Benney, seconded by Councillor Skoulding and agreed that the application be APPROVED against officer’s recommendation with delegated authority given to officers to apply suitable conditions.

Members do not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal as they feel that the proposal makes a positive contribution to the area and without any intervention it will bring a lack of benefit to the area and it does not adversely effect any of the neighbouring dwellings.

(Councillors Benney and Murphy declared, under Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that they are members of Chatteris Town Council Committee, but take no part in Planning matters)

(Councillor Benney stated that the applicant for this item is known to him, but it would not make any difference to his decision making and voting on the application)

(Councillors Murphy, Benney, Connor and Councillor Mrs Davis stated that the agent for this item is known to them in a professional capacity, but it would not make any difference to their decision making and voting on the application)