Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed the Committee members and officers to the virtual Planning Committee meeting being held via Skype.  The Chair explained that the meeting was being live streamed on the Council’s YouTube channel to enable members of the public to observe the committee.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Roger Bennett and Bill Hartnett.  Councillor Anthony Lovell attended as substitute for Councillor Bennett, and Councillor Yvonne Smith attended as substitute for Councillor Hartnett.

To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests and / or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED that

The Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 23^rd September 2020 be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

Update report attached including additional photographs in relation to Application 20/00897/FUL – 29 Lineholt Close ( Agenda item 8).

Members confirmed that they had received and read the Update Report.

Erection of one three storey building to provide 12no. one bed apartments for affordable rent

Officers presented the application and in doing so reminded Members that they had recently considered and resolved to, in principle grant consent for a full planning application on the same site in June 2020, under reference 19/01622/FUL.  The previous application had been for two three storey buildings including 90 square metres of office space.

Accord Housing was now seeking to develop the site in a different configuration, and the current application was for one three storey building of one bedroom apartments for affordable rent.  The proposed structure was identical to the building referred to as Block 2 on the previous application.

In taking Members through the plans, Officers highlighted the location of the proposed apartment block, the change in the position of the access from Edward Street, that there would be 12 car parking spaces provided, and that a small electricity sub-station would be located on the site to serve surrounding properties.

Although the quantum of units provided would be lower than the previous application, the level of density was acceptable, as was the design.

Mr Carl Taylor from Accord Housing Association addressed the Committee under the Council’s Public Speaking Rules.

In debating the application Members commented on the reduction in the number of residential units, but nevertheless welcomed the development in terms of the benefits of providing affordable housing and contributing to the regeneration of the Edward Street area.  Members also noted the comments from the public speaker regarding the innovative design for the proposed building and the initiative to make it plastic free.

RESOLVED that

Having regard to the development plan and to all other material considerations, authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to grant planning permission subject to:-

a.    The satisfactory completion of a section 106 obligation ensuring that:

·       Contributions are paid to the Borough Council in respect to off-site open space, and equipped play in accordance with the Councils adopted SPD

·       Contributions are paid to the Borough Council towards the provision of waste and recycling facilities for the new development

·       Contributions are paid to the Borough Council towards the provision of improvements and environmental enhancements to the Town Centre

·       Contributions are paid to Worcestershire County Council for localised improvements to bus stop infrastructure and lining and signing for cycle routes.

·       Contributions are paid to the NHS Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) towards GP Surgeries

·       A minimum of 3 units of accommodation are restricted to affordable housing in perpetuity

·       A S106 monitoring fee/s are paid to the Borough Council

and

b.    The conditions and informatives listed on pages 16 to 20 of the agenda.

Rear and side extensions together with internal alterations

Members considered an application for a domestic extension which proposed a first floor side extension, a single and two storey addition to the rear and a single storey extension to the side of the building.

Officers took Members through the slides and photographs in the presentations pack and outlined the details of the proposed changes and the position of the property in relation to nearby dwellings.  It was noted that three objections had been received.

Officers had considered the issues of character of the proposed extension and residential amenity and concluded that the application complied with the relevant policies and would not cause harm to residential or visual amenity.

In responding to questions from Members, officers clarified that an additional parking space was being provided under the scheme and this would be secured through condition 4 on page 24.

RESOLVED that

Having regard to the development plan and to all other material considerations, planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out on pages 23 to 24 of the agenda.

Extension of first floor rear gable extension (amending approval 2016/380/FUL)

Officers outlined the application and in doing so explained that planning permission had been granted in 2016 for a single and two storey rear extension including a loft conversion.  Work had commenced in September 2019 but then halted in early 2020 prior to the extension being completed.

The current planning application was seeking permission to extend the rear gable over the single storey element of the extension approved under application 2016/380/FUL, and would raise the ridge line of the existing roof of the property by 300mm.

It was noted that objections to the application had been received from occupants of number 28 and number 30 Lineholt Close whose properties abutted the application site.

Officers took Members through the slides in the Presentations Pack and explained the physical dimensions of the proposed extension in comparison to the 2016 permission, and in relation to the neighbouring dwellings at number 28 and number 30 Lineholt Close.  Members were referred to the additional images in the Update Report which included photographs taken from the gardens of the neighbouring properties and from the first floor.

It was noted that the proposed extension was significant in size and this raised the issue of impact on residential amenity.  With regard to any potential overshadowing and loss of light, officers had assessed the application carefully and found that it complied with the 45 degree line guidance as set out in the Councils Design SPD.  In reaching this view officers had taken into consideration that the rear gardens of all three properties faced due north. Similarly, officers had considered the issue of whether the proposed extension would be overbearing, and were satisfied that an overbearing impact would not occur.

Overall, whilst the size of the proposed extension was significant, Officers had concluded that the application complied with policy and it was recommended for approval.

The following speakers addressed the Committee under the Council’s public speaking rules, the first in objection to the application:-

Mr and Mrs Maxwell -  local residents (comments read out by an officer)

Mr Jason Knight - the applicant

In debating the application Members discussed the impact of the proposed extension on the neighbouring dwellings, whether there may be grounds to refuse the application and whether there was sufficient information to make a decision.  Other views were expressed in favour of granting the application in accordance with the officer recommendation.

Officers advised that the additional photographs in the Update Report had been provided to aid Members in visualising the site.

A recommendation was proposed and seconded that the application be deferred for a site visit.

An amended recommendation was proposed and seconded that the application be approved in accordance with the officer recommendation.

On being put to the vote the amended recommendation was approved and became the substantive recommendation.  Members proceeded to take a further vote on the proposal that the application be approved.

Resolved that

Having regard to the development plan and to all other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.