Agenda item

Application for determination: -

Erection of a detached dwelling.

The Senior Planner presented the report detailing an application for the erection of a detached dwelling.

Councillor Williams, the ward member for Longlevens, addressed the committee in opposition to the application.

She objected to the application on the following grounds:

-        PPS3 had been introduced to remove the classification of previously developed lands, which granted Council’s power to reject applications;

-        The plot was far smaller than laid out in the report;

-        Traffic concerns;

-        Overdevelopment;

-        Granting the application would mean that there would be no space for safe deliveries;

-        The Planning officer had indicated that the application would be refused previously.

A local resident addressed the committee in opposition to the application.

The local resident objected to the application on the following grounds:

-        The proposal would not integrate with the street scene;

-        Overdevelopment; 

-        Did not meet the design requirements outlined in paragraph 6.10 of the report;

-        Highway Concerns (increase in traffic, road safety issues)

-        Potential for noise pollution;

-        Potential for overshadowing the only south-facing window of a neighbouring property;

-        There were six objectors, not the three outlined in the report. 

A planning consultant of PJS Development Solutions Ltd addressed the committee in support of the application on behalf of the applicant.

The Planning Consultant stated that the application should be granted on the following grounds:

-        National policies and the joint core strategy encouraged building dwellings such as the one proposed;

-        Neighbours had been properly informed of the application;

-        Highways had concluded that there were no justifiable grounds in which to object to the application;

-        There would be no light or overbearing impact on the area or neighbouring properties;

-        The design of the dwelling would protect the privacy of neighbours;

-        The scheme complied with the planning framework;

-        The proposal would deliver a modest quality home for a small household.

The Senior Planner responded to members’ questions regarding traffic in the area, the size of the dwelling, and the effect on the street scene in the area as follows

-        PPS3 is no longer applicable.

-        An informal comment had been made about potentially rejecting the application very early on during the process but subject to conditions outlined in the report, the recommendation was for granting the application.

-        Gloucestershire Highways had raised no objections subject to planning conditions being met.

-        The new proposed dwelling would be a two bedroomed property and would measure 4.9 metres to the eaves and 7.2 metres at its highest point. This isn’t considered overdevelopment of the site.

Members’ Debate

Councillor Walford stated that he was not against the principle of building the dwelling. However, he stated that he had concerns with the fact that Highways had not raised a comment when congestion in the area was a substantial issue. He stated that he believed that Highways had not looked at the application in enough depth.

The Vice-Chair stated that he agreed with the member that the area often became congested. However, he added that Highways would only comment on an application if it would create ‘severe’ disruption, which the proposed development would not.

Councillor Walford questioned whether the application could go back to Gloucestershire Highways to investigate the issue of congestion and traffic within the area before coming back before Committee.

The Chair stated that the area was busy, but that a nearby nursery created far more trip generation than the proposed dwelling would.

The Vice-Chair stated that he believed that Highways had conducted a traffic survey in the area two years ago.

Councillor Tracey noted that the application being granted would only lead to there being two to three extra cars in the area. She stated that this would not lead to a significant increase of traffic in the area and that she would support the application. 

Councillor Walford member stated that he believed that Highways would be conducting a traffic survey in the area in the next couple of weeks and that he believed that it would demonstrate how congested the area could get.

Councillor Chambers stated that that there would be some loss of light to a neighbouring property, that there would be an impact regarding traffic in the area and that there would be an impact on the street scene in the area, even if it was a limited one.

The Chair moved, and the Vice-Chair seconded the officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED that: - planning permission is granted subject to the conditions outlined in the report.