Agenda item

(Councillors Matthew Barber, Roger Cox, Terry Cox, Peter Jones, Monica Lovatt, Terry Quinlan, Margaret Turner, Pam Westwood and John Woodford had each declared a personal interest in this item and in accordance with Standing Order 34 they remained in the meeting during its consideration).

Further to the report the Committee noted that additional correspondence has been received from the neighbour raising concerns regarding the accuracy of the plans and the proximity of the dwelling and garage to his property.

The Officers advised that there remained some doubt that the latest submitted plans were accurate in respect of the relationship of the house and garage to the neighbour at Hillside Cottage and as such it was suggested that it would appropriate in this case to seek an independent surveyor’s opinion to resolve the matter.

Mr Goodhead made a statement objecting to the application raising concerns relating to matters already covered in the report.  He specifically raised concerns regarding the house being built in the wrong location; the volume increase which exceeded 35%; height; proximity to his boundary; mass; incorrect plans; lack of support from the Planning Authority in addressing his concerns; dominance; adverse impact and loss of amenity.  He reported that it would be unreasonable to take any action regarding the position of the house which he accepted, but considered that the Council should address the height of the garage and its siting.  Finally, he requested that all permitted development rights should be removed.

Mr I Bedford, the applicant’s agent made a statement in support of the application advising that it had never been the intention to build the house in the wrong location.  He explained that he had taken the original survey to be accurate which had not been the case.  He reported that the house and garage were the same size as those approved and had been built in the only location possible on the site.

One of the local Members expressed sympathy with the views of the objector but considered that there were no grounds to refuse the application, but agreed that permitted development rights should be removed and that a condition to address slab levels should be added. The other local Member concurred with this view.

Other Members agreed with the views of the local Members.  In being minded to approve the application, consideration was given to whether the view of an independent surveyor on the accuracy of the plans was necessary.  The Committee came to the conclusion that such a survey was not warranted in this case as Members were able to assess the proposal in view of the application being retrospective and construction already having taken place.

By 15 votes to nil with 2 abstentions, it was

RESOLVED

that the Chief Executive in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Development Control Committee and the other local Member be delegated authority to approve application SHI/17672/5 subject to: -

(i)         the conditions set out in the report; and

(ii)        further conditions removing permitted development rights; addressing slab levels and requiring that the garage shall be used only as ancillary accommodation to the dwelling.