Decision details

Councillors Simon Coles and Habib Farbahi, having earlier declared an interest, left the room during consideration of this item. 

Councillor Sarah Wakefield advised that one of the public speakers was known to her and she declared a personal interest in the item. 

The Planning Officer presented the application and highlighted the key considerations.  She advised the recommendation was to approve the application for the widening of the access road and the provision of a car parking space.  She noted that one further representation had been received raising structural concerns and clarified that this would be addressed by the Building Control service.  She concluded that any future development to the rear of the site was not part of the current application. 

Two local residents addressed the committee in objection to the application.  Some of their comments included:

·       No site notice had been displayed at the address.

·       Structural surveys should be supplied and a water sewage pipe to the rear of the properties should be taken into account.

·       The proposed parking space should follow highway regulations as it would currently mean manoeuvring and reversing onto the highway.

·       Five properties have access rights to the rear of their properties and permission should not be given until those 5 have agreed to it.

In response to questions, officers confirmed that:

·       Ownership of land and rights of way were not material planning considerations.

·       Structural concerns raised by objectors would be considered by Party Wall legislation and by Building Regulations.

·       The disabled parking space could be located elsewhere on the street.

·       It was not illegal to reverse onto a public highway.  A condition to prevent reversing onto the highway would not be enforceable.

·       Neighbour notification requirements had been met and they specified either a site notice or neighbour notification together with publicity in the local press.

During discussion it was noted that there were no planning reasons to refuse the application and the Highway advice had not raised any safety concerns.

It was then proposed by the Councillor Andy Sully and seconded by Councillor Andy Hadley to approve the application as per the officer’s recommendation. On being put to the vote this was carried by 8 votes in favour, 0 against and 1 abstention.

RESOLVED:

That application 38/23/0098 be approved subject to the conditions listed at Appendix 1 to the agenda report for the following reason:

The proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenity of the area or living conditions of nearby residents. It is therefore considered to comply with the policies in the development plan and permission is granted subject to the conditions contained in the agenda report.  

(voting: 8 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)