Meeting documents

SSDC Area North Committee
Wednesday, 22nd July, 2015 2.00 pm

  • Meeting of Area North Committee, Wednesday 22nd July 2015 2.00 pm (Item 37.)

Minutes:

Proposal: Erection of a 1.5 storey dwellinghouse and associated detached garage/annex on land adjacent to Brick House, works to a low level wall, and demolition of small dilapidated structure.

 

The Planning Officer presented the application as detailed in the agenda report, and highlighted to members the updated comments received from the parish council which indicated their full support for the proposal.

 

Mr M Hawkins and Mr M Robinson spoke in support of the application and their comments included:

·         The applicants were model neighbours – five generations of the same family had lived in the house, and the family had supported the village in many ways over the years

·         Brick House is a difficult building to live in, in old age.

·         Need a large family in Brick House to support the village

·         Materials and design are sympathetic to neighbouring houses

·         Annex at Podgers Orchard which is adjacent to a listed building had recently been approved and feel the community would feel it injust if this application were not to be approved.

 

Mrs M Lock, applicant, provided a brief history of the family living and working in Drayton for around 150 years. She noted that the family were fond of Brick House, but now in retirement years they were finding the house less suitable. The proposal would allow them to continue to live independently in the village, and Brick House with its six rooms needed to be enjoyed by a large family.

 

Mr F Della Valle, agent, commented the application had the full support of the local community and was designed to meet the applicants needs. He highlighted that the village had several facilities and reference was made to the proximity of the site to nearby listed buildings and conservation area. He noted until the 1990s part of the site was covered in glass houses, and the low wall to be altered was not very visible from the road. The position of the proposed dwelling was clearly in line with built development and should be considered infill.

 

Ward member, Councillor Tiffany Osborne, supported the application and noted the site of dwelling was outside the conservation area but the existing access was within. She referred to the Podgers Orchard application which had been recently approved despite some local objection, and disagreed with the comments made by the Conservation Officer, in the report for this application, that this proposal would impact on nearby listed buildings. She noted the proposal would provide a sensible and sensitive solution for the applicants to continue living in the village, and Brick House would offer an opportunity for a large family to move into the village.

 

During a short discussion, several members felt the application should be approved as it had the support of the community and would not have an adverse impact on the conservation area, and it was suggested to approve the application for that reason.

 

Hearing the comments made, and as many members were minded to approve the application, the Area Lead suggested the wording for the justification could be that the proposal, by reason of its scale, design and siting, respects the character and appearance of the setting, including the setting of the conservation area and the listed buildings, and causes no demonstrable harm to residential amenity. The proposed dwelling accords with local policy in that it represents a unit of accommodation meeting an identified local housing need. The Planning Officer advised there should be conditions and these were explained to members.

 

It was proposed to approve the application, contrary to the officer recommendation, for the justification as suggested by the Area Lead and subject to the conditions as recommended by the Planning Officer. On being put to the vote the proposal was carried 10 in favour and 3 against.

 

RESOLVED:

That planning application 15/01761/FUL be APPROVED , contrary to the officer recommendation, subject to the following:

 

Justification

 

01.   The proposal, by reason of its scale, design and siting, respects the character and appearance of the setting, including the setting of the conservation area and the listed buildings, and causes no demonstrable harm to residential amenity. The proposed dwelling represents a unit of accommodation meeting an identified local housing need. In these respects, the proposal accords with the aims of the NPPF and Policies SD1, SS1, SS2, EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

Subject to the following conditions:

 

01.   The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

 

Reason: To accord with the provisions of section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

 

02.   The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: the drawings ref. F1239 numbers 100A, 101A and 102A.

 

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

03.   No development hereby permitted shall be commenced unless particulars of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

 

a)    materials (including the provision of samples where appropriate) to be used for external walls and roofs; these details shall be supported by a sample panel of natural stone indicating coursing and pointing which shall be made available on site prior to commencement;

b)    full design details and material and external finish to be used for all windows, all external doors, lintels, entrance gates, boarding and openings;

c)    details of all eaves and fascia board detailing, guttering, downpipes and other rainwater goods; and

d)    details of the surface material for the access, parking and turning area;

and

e)    details of all boundary treatments.

 

Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the area and to accord with the NPPF and Policies EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

04.   The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a scheme of landscaping, which shall include indications of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land, and details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of the development, as well as details of any changes proposed in existing ground levels. All planting, seeding, turfing or earth moulding comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

 

Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the area and to accord with the NPPF and Policies EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

05.   The upper storey windows on the east elevation of the building(s) hereby approved shall be permanently obscure glazed and fixed closed in accordance with details which shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development. Such details, once implemented, shall be permanently retained and maintained.

 

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity in accordance with Policy EQ2 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

06.   The area allocated for parking on the submitted plans ref. F1239/100A and F1239/102A shall be kept clear of obstruction at all times and shall not be used other than for the parking of vehicles in connection with the development hereby permitted.

 

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policy TA5 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

07.   There shall be no obstruction to visibility greater than 300mm above adjoining road level forward of the visibility splays shown on the submitted plan ref. F1239/102A. Such visibility shall be fully provided before works commence on the development hereby permitted and shall thereafter be maintained at all times.

 

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and to accord with Policy TA5 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

08.   No development hereby approved shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved by the local planning authority.

 

Reason: To safeguard any archaeological remains on the site and to accord with the aims of the NPPF and Policy EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

09.   Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no garages or other outbuildings or structures shall be erected other than those expressly authorised by this permission.

 

Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the area and to accord with the NPPF and Policies EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

10.   Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no additional windows, including dormer windows, or other openings (including doors) shall be formed in the buildings, or other external alteration made without the prior express grant of planning permission.

 

Reason: In the interests of amenity and to safeguard the character and appearance of the area and to accord with the NPPF and Policies EQ2 and EQ3 of the South Somerset Local Plan.

 

(Voting; 10 in favour, 3 against)

Supporting documents: