Agenda item

Refusal.

Public Speaker

Frank Lees (supporting)

The Senior Planning Officer presented the report and displayed plans and photographs of the site, including a plan that had been submitted following the previous meeting showing the building in context with the street scene.  He also displayed two additional photographs at the request of the applicant, showing developments along Heath Lane, and photographs taken from the adjacent property showing the site in context.  He recommended refusal of this application as set out in the report.

The Senior Planning Officer clarified the flood zones and stated that the Environment Agency had objected to the application.  The Environment Agency had acknowledged that the site was likely to be designated as Flood Zone 1, but the maps had not been officially updated and the application had to be determined as existing.

Councillor Mrs W Fredericks, the local Member, stated that the Parish Council supported this application.  The street view was extremely varied, with the only exception being the garages.  The applicant wanted to build a new dwelling for his retirement, which would release a 4-bed home to accommodate a family.  She referred to the flood zone review.

Councillor Mrs A Fitch-Tillett referred to the lack of the required information with regard to flooding and expressed concern that water would flow through the site in a rain event and into the River Mun.  She proposed refusal of this application as recommended by the Head of Planning.

Councillor A Varley considered that Heath Lane was a charming, idyllic setting and the existing garages did not belong to the setting.  He considered that the design of the proposed dwelling was ambitious and would enhance the area.  However, he would hesitate to approve the application until there was certainty with regard to the flood zones.

Councillor N Pearce supported the views expressed by Councillor Mrs Fitch-Tillett.  He also considered that the proposed design was not in keeping with Heath Lane as it was cramped, did not match the heritage of the site and was not conducive to good planning.  Whilst he had sympathy with the applicant, he seconded the proposal to refuse this application.

Councillor A Yiasimi considered that the proposed dwelling would enhance the area and the existing garages were an eyesore.  Although the new flood zone designation had not been officially confirmed, the Officers had the information in writing and he therefore supported the application.

Councillor R Kershaw noted from the photographs of other infill dwellings on Heath Lane that they were lower than the surrounding buildings and within a larger space.  The proposed dwelling appeared to be higher than the adjacent dwellings, although the report stated that it was not.  However, he considered that the site would be cramped.

Councillor A Brown supported Councillor Kershaw’s views and noted that 3 Heath Lane would have a gable immediately contiguous with its boundary and he considered that light to the existing gable window would be severely compromised.

Councillor Mrs W Fredericks asked if it would be appropriate to defer consideration until the flood zone designation was confirmed.

The Head of Planning explained that the Council had to make decisions on the basis of the information it had.  There was a current planning appeal on this site and it was likely that the Planning Inspector would rule on design and other issues which would provide a clear precedent.  Deferral pending a decision on the flood zone could cause difficulties and he recommended that the application was determined on the current basis.

RESOLVED with 13 votes in favour

That this application be refused in accordance with the recommendation of the Head of Planning.