Agenda item

Erection of 1no. attached dwelling to side. [Fishergate Ward]

Members considered a full application by Stephen Hazell for the erection of 1no. attached dwelling to side.

The Development Manager gave a presentation on the plans and provided a written update to Committee which detailed a revised condition 5, for clarification purposes and an additional condition relating to the location and specification of works for the erection of the stone arch which stipulated that these should be submitted for written approval of the Local Planning Authority.  The Development Manager recommended a further condition, not included in the written update, requiring a scheme for noise insulation measures to mitigate road noise.

The Development Manager provided further clarification on the plans regarding vehicle access for the rear parking at no. 126.

Public Speakers

Dorothy Knott, a neighbour, spoke to raise safety concerns relating to the size and positioning of the historic arch, the planned planting and the potential to block sightlines for traffic.  She noted that there had been ongoing building work in the vicinity which had caused difficulties relating to skip and traffic management.

In response to questions from Members, she stated that bushes or low level planting would be preferable to trees in the planting scheme.

Stephen Hazell, the applicant, spoke in support of the application and opened by thanking both planning and conservation officers.  He noted the concerns over the design that had been raised by residents and confirmed the planting scheme was to contain shrubs rather than trees.  He stated that there were more than adequate sightlines for traffic.  He also stated that he was flexible on the location of the arch.

Officers responded to further questions from Members and reported that Highways had not raised concerns regarding the location of the parking bays, sightlines were covered in condition 8.

Following debate, Cllr Warters moved the officer recommendation to approve the application, subject to the s106 agreement, and the tabled update which covered the amendment to condition 5 and included two additional conditions related to the stone arch and the noise insulation.  The additional condition referring to the stone arch was amended to specifically exclude the location shown on the drawing.  There was also an amendment to condition 7 to refer to soft landscaping.

This was seconded by Cllr Orrell.

Members voted unanimously in favour of the motion and it was:

Resolved:                       That the application be approved, subject to the amendments outlined above.

Reason:                         It is considered that the proposal would make efficient use of the former hotel site which currently detracts from the appearance of the Conservation Area.  The proposed property is relatively bold, however, the scale and design relates well to the host property and it creates a feature of the end/corner elevation.  The height drops towards the listed lodge. It is not considered to detract from the character or appearance of the Conservation Area or setting of the listed building. 

It is not considered it would cause unacceptable harm to neighbours’ living conditions and provides suitable cycle parking.  The accessible location is such that the property is not reliant on use of a car, though occupiers can seek to obtain on-street parking permits.

The proposal accords with national planning policy and draft local policy therefore is recommended for approval subject to conditions and subject to the signing of a legal agreement to secure a financial contribution towards improvements to nearby off-site play and amenity space.

[5.43pm, Cllr Hollyer left the meeting and Cllr Orrell replaced him as Chair.]