Issue - meetings

Committee considered a detailed report in relation to the above application.

The application had been referred to Planning Committee by Councillor David Bennett due to concerns raised regarding the impact the additional traffic resulting from five additional dwellings would have on an already overcrowded street.

The application sought approval for the partial demolition of garden outbuildings to facilitate the erection of five, two storey dwellings.

The site would utilise the existing access onto Mitchell Street and the proposal retained two parking spaces for the existing dwelling at 44 Mitchell Street. Each of the dwellings proposed had two parking spaces which met the Council’s parking requirements which was set out in the Local Plan. The proposal included a shared on-site turning area which would allow vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward facing direction and there would be a passing place on the driveway to prevent the need for vehicles to reverse onto or off from the highway should two vehicles need to pass.

The principle of residential development to the rear of dwellings which front Mitchell Street had already been established by development of the adjacent sites which had two storey dwellings constructed in what was originally back gardens.

The application was recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Letters of objection had been received from four neighbouring properties which were detailed in the report.

Further information was contained in the Supplementary Update Report, which advised of a further letter of objection received regarding the application, and that there was no change to the recommendation in the main report.

Charlotte Stainton (Agent) attended the meeting and spoke for the application.

Councillor David Bennett, District Councillor, not on the Planning Committee, attended the meeting and spoke against the application.

Pamela Hook attended the meeting and spoke against the application.

Dominic Webb attended the meeting to request the application be deferred to a later date to allow for further consideration on soakaways and boundary treatments.

The Principal Planneraddressed the issues raised in relation to soakaways and boundary treatments and stated that a number of points raised could already be undertaken through permitted development. As for the soakaway, building regulations would have to be followed and they would be tested to ensure they was fit for purpose.

Councillor Phil Smith raised concern over allowing the applicant to control the hours of operation of the site and queried if a condition could be added to control when deliveries etc could be made due to the congestion already on the street.

The Principal Planner advised that all conditions imposed needed to be reasonable for the size of the development and in this instance under other legislation there was sufficient control. If there were issues with the development then Environmental Health could investigate and take action when necessary.

Moved by Councillor Duncan McGregor and seconded by Councillor Chris Kane

RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

1.    The development must be begun before the expiration of three years from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55