Agenda item

The Planning Officer presented the report and outlined the reasons for refusal as detailed in the report. The location is acceptable in terms of the policies, local needs housing and local connection for the applicant.  The housing needs to remain affordable.  The need that has been demonstrated is for a single person property therefore policy dictates the size of the property, this application exceeds the size dictated by the policies.  It was noted that the dwelling should be 97m² but is in fact 100m² (although a 97m² dwelling would still exceed the size thresholds for the identified need).

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme.

·         Andrew Rouke – Applicant

Some Members had visited the site the previous day.

The following points were discussed:

·         It was logical and practical to allow a larger sized building.

·         The Applicant is happy to reduce the size from 100m² to 97m².

·         The application can only be considered on the grounds of the information presented, cannot approve a dwelling that is the size of a five person dwelling for one person.  Members felt it was unrealistic to expect the applicant to build a 39m² house.

·         The policy is responding to the local needs in the area.  There is a requirement to be consistent in how the policy is applied and need to look at the characteristics of the area.

·         This property would not be part of a housing association or the council.

·         Members felt it was not practical to build such a small home as the Applicants circumstance may change in the future, should be more flexible and make reasonable provision for the future.

·         There was a suggestion that the application be deferred to gain more information and compromise on the size of the house, perhaps reducing it to the size of a four person house.

·         Members were requested to provide material reasons for departing from policy and also to respond to the harm the development would cause to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

A motion to approve the application with conditions was proposed and seconded but not voted on.  This motion was then amended to defer the application to allow the applicant to amend the plans to alter the design of the dwelling and to bring it within 97m². This motion was proposed and seconded, put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED:

That the application be DEFERRED for the following reasons:

1.    To allow the applicant to amend the plans to alter the design of the scheme and to bring it within 97m²