Agenda item

Councillors Tony de Vere and Mary de Vere had each declared a personal interest in this matter and in accordance with Standing Order 34 remained in the room during its consideration.

Officers referred to the variety of house styles and sizes in this part of Drayton and showed photographs of the site. It was noted that 11 letters of objection had been received and that Drayton Parish Council objected to the development.  It was noted that the letters raised a number of concerns, highlighted in the report. Officers commented that the concerns raised in respect of loss of privacy and overlooking had been addressed by the fact that the side facing first floor windows in plot 1 were obscure glazed and the ground floor windows faced the blank flank wall. Officers commented that this led to the conclusion that there were no planning grounds on which to refuse the application in relation to the impact on neighbouring properties.

Councillor Jennifer Pooley of Drayton Parish Council spoke in objection to the application. She stated that the builder of this property had flouted the original planning permission. She advised that this development was out of keeping with the surrounding area and made a mockery of the planning process. She stated that by permitting the building a message would be sent that the Parish and District Council Planning Committees could be ignored.

She raised the following concerns:-

• The development was overbearing and large
• The plans stated that the outside finish was to be brick and tile hung. The actual building was entirely brick, which was unattractive and detrimental to the area.
• The plans made reference to two glass conservatories at the rear. The actual building had brick built rooms to the rear.
• The area of land laid to concrete in front of the property was unattractive, particularly with the bollards near the pavement.

She concluded by urging the Committee to support the objections of the neighbours and the Parish Council.

Mr Adam Barak made a statement in objection to the application. He commented that the plans for what currently lay on site had never been approved. He stated that the Vale’s planning officers had dismissed objections and considered the Officer’s report to be inaccurate.

He stated that the design was too big for the plot, was out of character and the development had resulted in a loss of amenity to his property as the boundary fences were 1.5 metres from his house. He raised further concerns that the 40 degree rule had been broken, loss of light to number 37 Sutton Wick Lane and that the development had led to cars blocking the lane.

He strongly urged the Committee to refuse this application and order the building’s demolition.

Mr Opindar Liddar made a statement on behalf of the applicant in support of the application. He stated that the plans had been approved last year.  He confirmed that materials had been approved and several conditions had been attached. He advised that the planning enforcement team had visited the site and concluded that it was fine.

The Development Control Manager explained that in this application planning permission had been granted in September 2007, however it subsequently came to light that the Ordnance Survey plan which had been used as part of the application was inaccurate in showing the relationship between the neighbouring properties and the development.

Some Members commented that they were sympathetic with the objectors, one Member stating that the bollards were particularly unattractive.

Some Members were of the view that there was no justification in planning terms to refuse the application. One Member questioned whether there had been a requirement that landscaping be carried out to the front of the property. It was confirmed that this could be required as part of the conditions.

By 11 votes in favour with 4 abstentions it was

RESOLVED

that planning permission be granted in respect of application DRA/2046(2) subject to the conditions set out in the Officer’s report and an additional condition requiring a landscaping treatment.