Agenda item

Further to the report the Committee was advised that a further letter of objection had been received raising concerns regarding the design and access statement was inadequate.  Members were informed that an e-mail from the applicant’s agent had been received which drew attention to permitted development rights and advising that the properties could be altered at a future date in any event and that there would be less disruption if such works were undertaken at this stage.

Mr Roger Turnball the neighbour made a statement objecting to the application in terms of the inadequacy of the design and access statement. He referred to Circular 1 of 2006 which stated what was required in such a statement.  He explained that matters such as the justification of layout; scale; clearance and landscaping etc would need to be included and that as part of this there should be community involvement; an evaluation of information collected; alternatives to how the development needs could be met and the design needed to show how that assessment had been carried out.  He stated that the design and access statement submitted as part of this application was comprised of only three short paragraphs which in his view was wholly inadequate.  He considered that in accepting this statement the Council would be setting a precedent for the future.  He suggested that it might be helpful if the Council included information on the requirements of design and access statements on its website.  Furthermore he expressed concern regarding the possible loss a tree. He explained that fencing around the tree had been removed and he sought a condition that should the tree be removed it should be replaced with a tree similar in location, size and species. Finally, he commented that there should be planning conditions and that there should be a survey of the trees on site.

One Member spoke in support of the application commenting that planning permission already existed for two dwellings on this site and therefore the Committee was being asked to consider the difference between the two schemes.  However, he suggested that additional conditions should be added to any permission to address slab levels and the protection of trees during construction.

In response to a question raised regarding the hedge which had been removed along the front boundary it was commented that an informative advising that the Council would look to see this replaced could be attached to any permission.

One Member made reference to the comments made by the speaker and it was noted that the design and access statements were required for all new dwellings and that the reason why the short statement had been accepted in this case was that planning permission already existed for two dwellings.

By 13 votes to nil it was

RESOLVED

that application EHE/19767 be approved subject to: -

(1)        the conditions set out in the report;

(2)        additional conditions to address slab levels and to provide for the protection of tress during construction; and

(3)        an informative to advise that the Council would wish for a hedge to be reinstated along the frontage boundary.