Agenda item

Committee considered a detailed report in relation to the above application presented by the Development Management and Land Charges Manager, who gave details of the application and highlighted the location and features of the site and key issues.  The planning application sought approval for single storey extensions to the front and rear of the property.

The applicant was employed by a Council owned company, and for transparency purposes brought before Committee.

Members raised concerns with regards the exclusion of the garage from the provided documentation and subsequent access issues to the rear if garage ultimately retained.  The Development Management and Land Charges Manager informed the intended retention of the garage had not been necessary for the application as it was a building regulation issue and not a Planning one.

The Development Management and Land Charges Manager advised that the application sought permission for the extensions only and that the plans showed the garage to be demolished.  It was pointed out that the applicant had suggested to Members on site that the garage could be retained.  If the garage was retained this would result in a different scheme, requiring elevational changes.

Members agreed to add a footnote for clarity stating that if the approved development did not include the retention of the existing garage and that should the garage be retained, this would result in elevational changes to the rear extension that would require consideration as part of a new planning application.

Moved by Councillor Phil Smith and seconded by Councillor John Ritchie

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

1.    The development must be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

2.    The development must be carried out in accordance with the plans received on the 28^th November 2024.

3.    The external wall and roof materials used in both the front and rear extensions, mustbe of the same type, colour and texture as those used in the existing building.

4.    If the approved development did not include the retention of the existing garage and that should the garage be retained, this would result in elevational changes to the rear extension that would require consideration as part of a new planning application.

            Reasons for Conditions:

1.    To comply with the provisions of Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.    For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning of the local area.

3.    To ensure a satisfactory standard of external appearance and in compliance with policies SC2 and SC3 of the Local Plan for Bolsover District.

            Statement of Decision Process:

1.    Officers have worked positively and pro-actively with the applicant to address issues raised during the consideration of the application. The proposal has been considered against the policies and guidelines adopted by the Council and the decision has been taken in accordance with the guidelines of the Framework.

            Equalities Statement:

            Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010 places a statutory duty on public             authorities in the exercise of their functions to have due regard to the             need to eliminate discrimination and advance equality of opportunity             between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and             persons who do not share it (i.e., “the Public Sector Equality Duty”).

            In this case, there is no evidence to suggest that the development             proposals would have any direct or indirect negative impacts on any             person with a protected characteristic or any group of people with a             shared protected characteristic.

            Human Rights Statement:

            The specific Articles of the European Commission on Human Rights (‘the             ECHR’) relevant to planning include Article 6 (Right to a fair and public             trial within a reasonable time), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and             family life, home and correspondence), Article 14 (Prohibition of             discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 1 (Right to peaceful enjoyment             of possessions and protection of property).

            It is considered that assessing the effects that a proposal will have on             individuals and weighing these against the wider public interest in             determining whether development should be allowed to proceed is an             inherent part of the decision-making process. In carrying out this             ‘balancing exercise’ in the above report, officers are satisfied that the             potential for these proposals to affect any individual’s (or any group of             individuals’) human rights has been addressed proportionately and in             accordance with the requirements of the ECHR.