Agenda item

Members had visited the site on the previous day.

The Planning Officer confirmed that work had not yet started on the development approved in 2018 and that the annex approved in that application had been moved to be attached as a rear extension to the main house following discussions between the applicant and the Planning Officer.

The Planning Officer stated that the concrete wall which was located on the site of the proposed annex building had been expected to be removed following submission of a detailed landscape plan pursuant to the planning application in 2018, but this had not yet been discharged. The wall is shown on the approved 2018 plans as remaining with planting to the front, and the bank remains behind. As a result, the applicants’ starting point is with the wall in situ.

The Planning Officer noted that the second annex was acceptable in principle but that there were concerns regarding the harm to the landscape and the erosion of the openness of the site by adding another building and retaining the raised banking.

The following spoke under the Public Participation at Meetings Scheme:

·         Ms Amy Lewis, Applicant

Members requested clarification of the objections to the application as the site visit the previous day had not clarified this.

The Planning Officer confirmed that the previous application had included an annex in the same location as the application being considered. Planning officers had negotiated a change to the proposal to move the annex to the rear of the house to open up the site. The new application ‘closed’ the site and did not enhance the landscape scheme.  Planning officers had strived to reduce the ‘defensive’ nature of the design by moving the previously approved annex nearer to the house.

Members commented on the good design of the proposal.

A motion to approve the application contrary to Officer recommendation was moved and seconded.

If Members were minded to approve the application a condition to restrict the building to ancillary residential use would be required.

The motion to approve the application contrary to Officer recommendation and subject to conditions was voted on and carried.

RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:

1.    Commencement of development within three years

2.    No construction to take place in advance or separately to the construction work on the main house.

3.    Ancillary dependant unit to the house only part of the single planning unit.

4.    Detailed landscaping scheme

5.    Specification of materials to be agreed in advance of construction

6.    Metal, estate fencing to replace wall and mound as part of the landscaping scheme

7.    No external floodlighting of the site other than an external lighting scheme agreed in advance with the Authority in writing.

8.    The annexe for residential use only.

The meeting was adjourned at 11.30 for a short break and reconvened at 11.35