Agenda item

To determine the application.

Gavin Taylor presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Ian Gowler, the agent, and Nick Price, the applicant. Mr Price stated that he would like to build two quality self-build homes which would be one for his parents and one for his family, which includes four children. He explained that his old, dilapidated house is beyond economic repair, and he stated that he currently has buckets catching rainwater in both the kitchen and his son’s bedroom.

Mr Price made the point that he hopes he does not have to spend another winter in the house due to the cold and damp conditions causing his children to become ill and he aims to work with the developers from the mill development site which is further up the road and to replace a storm drain which runs alongside his plots which will solve the issue of flooding on Fallow Corner Drove. He added that the site will create a footpath for pedestrians to use around the corner and provide a wider visibility splay for motorists.

Mr Price stated that with regards to the concerns raised, in his opinion, he does not feel that there will be a negative impact on neighbouring dwellings, and at the present time there are large 30ft high conifers on the neighbouring property which provide a separation from his two plots. He stated that the sun rises in the rear, in the gardens of the neighbours’ properties and sets in the front.

Mr Gowler referred to the presentation screen and made reference to the overbearing nature of the proposed dwellings, making the point that in photograph two it shows large leylandii trees which are close to the windows of the bungalow and the proposed dwelling is 5 metres away from the exiting bungalow and the trees are on the neighbouring property and will, therefore, be retained. He explained that he has tried to keep that property as close as possible to the indicative layout that was provided to the committee so that there is no real change from the outline application to what is before the committee.

Mr Gowler made the point that one of the benefits to the development includes the introduction of the footpath which goes around the corner and also the intention of the applicant to try and improve the issue of surface water situation along Fallow Corner Drove. He expressed the opinion there have been changes made to the development in order to try and mitigate all of the reasons for previous refusals to the proposal and he would hope the committee can approve the application.

Members asked Mr Price and Mr Gowler the following questions:

·         Councillor Imafidon asked Mr Price for clarification with regards to what the area is like and does it include a mixture of both residential and commercial premises. Mr Price explained that he is currently living on the site, and it is mainly residential. Mr Gowler stated that previously across the road from the site there had been industrial buildings and approval for a dwelling on the site was given approximately 10 years ago and there is also a site under development for two extra dwellings opposite the site.

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

·         Councillor Hicks stated that he was surprised to see the size of the site when he visited it especially when considering how big it will be once the existing dwelling is removed. He made the point that he sees the proposal as a natural progression of the village and, in his opinion, there are no issues with the application and he will support it.

·         Councillor Imafidon stated that he is encouraged to hear that the applicant is going to develop the site for his family to live in and for their betterment, health and wellbeing. He added that there is already a dwelling on the site, the site is on the edge of the village and the land appears to lie higher than that of the farmland adjacent to the plot which places it in a better location in case of episodes of flooding. Councillor Imafidon stated that he will support the proposal.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that he agrees with the opinion of Councillor Imafidon, and he added that the main objection is overlooking of the neighbouring property. He expressed the view that when the full plans are compiled then he would expect that there would be the opportunity to mitigate against that by considering the layout, size and direction of how the two dwellings will sit.

·         Councillor Mrs French made the point that the application already has outline permission and this is the Reserved Matters application before the committee. She added that there is only one reason for refusal which is Policy LP16, and she added that she disagrees with that as she feels that the proposal will tidy up the corner and be an enhancement to the area.

·         Gavin Taylor clarified the point made by Councillor Gerstner and stated that the application is a detailed plan and contains the committed detail and layout of the dwellings. He explained that this follows the outline application and, therefore, what is before the committee is what is actually proposed.

·         Gavin Taylor referred to the point made with regards to the trees by Councillor Hicks and stated that the trees are located on the neighbours land and, therefore, there is a burden which lies with those residents to ensure that the trees are maintained at that height and density and should the trees die then there would be the requirement to replant trees immediately in order to try and screen their site off from the overbearing nature of the dwelling. He made the point that he would be concerned to suggest that the trees apply suitable mitigation as the development should mitigate its own impacts.

·         Gavin Taylor added that with regards to the actual physical impact of overlooking, there are no overlooking issues which have been raised due to the fact that the elevation gable that faces onto the existing property is actually a blank gable wall and the issue is one of overbearing and poor outlook to their amenity which is the reason for the proposed refusal. He added that the application has been refused previously on those exact grounds and the proposal has not changed in that respect. Gavin Taylor referred to the point made by Councillor Mrs French concerning the fact that the proposal will tidy the corner off, and the issue concerning the amenity impact and whether or not those residential amenity impacts have been overcome through the latest scheme rather than how it will look on the street scene as visual appearance was not raised as a concern previously in terms of character harm. He stated that what is being considered is the amenity and the relationship between the existing bungalow and the northern most plot on the site.

·         Gavin Taylor stated that members will recall the legal advice that they were provided previously concerning the reasons for refusal the last time. He added that the offer was to take the previous application to committee, however, it was suggested that there was no reason for the application to come before the committee due to the fact that the Chairman had agreed to those refusal reasons previously and it is a significant material consideration for members to reflect on.

Proposed by Councillor Hicks, seconded by Councillor Imafidon and agreed that the application be GRANTED against the officer’s recommendation.

Members do not support the officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they do not feel there would be an overbearing impact to the neighbouring property in accordance with Policies LP2 and LP16 and feel that the application will be an improvement to the area and street scene.

(Councillor Marks declared that he has had dealings with both the applicant and agent and took no part for the duration of the discussion and voting thereon)

(Councillor Connor declared that he knows the agent from when he was a member of Doddington Parish Council but does not socialise with him, and is not predetermined and will consider the application with an open mind)