Agenda item

Councillor Tony de Vere had declared a personal interest in this application and in accordance with Standing Order 34 he remained in the meeting during it consideration.

The Officers reported that should the Committee be minded to approve the application a further condition should be added to ensure that the posts to be used should be timber. 

Councillor Alan Bryden made a statement on behalf of the Town Council objecting to the application raising concerns regarding the proposal being contrary to Planning Policy HE1 and its adverse affect on the Northcourt Conservation Area.  He referred to a letter sent to Members of the Committee from Martin Smith, the Chair of the Planning and Highways Committee in this regard.  He explained that the property was in a prominent position, opposite where a telecom mast would have been had it not been dismissed on appeal, the reasons for which were relevant in his case.  He suggested that any proposal affecting the setting of the Conservation Area should be refused.   He commented that whilst it stated in the report that the proposal would be 18.5metres from the road, the canopies would be clearly visible from the road.  He explained that the house was once the home of Cecil Kimber the founder of MG and was of importance historically.  He reported that the proposal was out of keeping and character with the area and would adversely affect the setting of the Conservation Area.  He suggested that the proposal for this shelter for smokers next to the front door made a mockery of the purpose behind the legislation to prevent smoking in public places in that customers would need to pass through the area to access the front door.  He suggested that the application should be refused and that erecting such canopies to the rear of the property, where there was adequate room and accesses should be suggested to the applicant.

Some Members spoke against the application agreeing that it was not appropriate to site the non smoking area so close to the entrance. It was commented that the structure would be clearly visible in this open area and has such harmful to the appearance of the building.  It was suggested that the structure should be sited to the rear of the building.

One Member referred to the Design Statement noting that the Magnolia tree near the front door was to be removed. He expressed concern at the loss of this tree which he considered contributed significantly to the visual appearance of the building and should be protected. The Member reported that he had sought advice from the Council’s Arboricultural Officer regarding the need to place a Tree Preservation Order on the tree and he urged the Officers to follow this up.  It was suggested that the canopies could be re-sited further away from the entrance to protect the tree. 

Another Member made reference to the proximity of the Conservation Area commenting that some weight should be attached to that consideration. He agreed that if the Council’s Arboricultural Officer considered that the Magnolia tree was worthy of protection then the application should be refused.

In response to a question raised the Officers advised that this Committee needed to consider the planning merits of any proposal and not whether the proposal met the requirements of any other legislation, such as Environmental Health legislation which was a matter for the applicant.

It was proposed by Councillor Jerry Patterson, seconded by Councillor Richard Farrell and by 14 votes to nil, with 1 abstention it was

RESOLVED

(a)        that the Chief Executive in consultation with the Chair and/or Vice-Chair of the Development Control Committee be delegated authority to approve application ABG/400/6 subject to: -

(1)        the applicant agreeing to resite the 4 cone canopies away from the main entrance at a distance sufficient to result in the protection of the Magnolia tree (the equivalent of one unit to the right away from the entrance is suggested);

(2)        the conditions set out in the report;

(3)        a further condition to ensure that the posts to be used are timber.

(b)        that the Council’s Arboricultural Officer be requested to consider whether the Magnolia Tree is worthy of a Tree Preservation Order.