Resubmission with amendments of applications C15/1033/44/LL, C16/0144/44/LL and C16/0313/44/LL for the erection of a 3 bedroom dwelling.
LOCAL MEMBER: Councillor Selwyn Griffiths
Minutes:
Re-submission with amendments of applications refused under C15/1033/44/LL, C16/0144/44/LL and
C16/0313/44/LL to erect a three
bedroom property.
(a) The Senior Development Control Officer elaborated on the background of
the application and noted that this was a re-submission of a full application
that had been previously refused to erect a detached property with an
integrated garage and new vehicular access.
An amended application was submitted that included three bedrooms. The
application was amended by reducing the overall size of the proposed building
as well as removing some of the features.
It was noted that the current plan indicated that the width of the
building was 10.7m compared to 11.6m and 12.3m as refused previously, and the
height was also reduced to 6.7m from the previous 6.9m and 7.6m.
It was noted that the principle of erecting the house was acceptable as the site was within the development boundary of the village of
Borth-y-gest and outline permission had been approved in the past to erect a new house.
Attention was drawn to the fact that consistent
amendments had been made as a result
of the previous refusals in response to the planning authority's concerns.
It was recognised that concerns had been highlighted regarding this application that were consistent
with the objections submitted with the previous applications. Full consideration has been given to all the relevant planning matters submitted.
It was believed that the proposal was now acceptable based on the amendments made and the reduction
in the size of the proposed building and the site had already been considered
suitable for residential development by the approval of an earlier application.
It was recommended that the application should be approved with the conditions as noted
in the report.
(b) The Local
Member (not a member of this Planning Committee)
noted the following points:
·
That he objected
the previous application due to the size of the house, however, because of the
amendment to reduce its size, he was of the view that he could now not object
·
Whilst accepting
that there were concerns locally regarding he quality of the land these
concerns had been addressed in the report before them
·
The land behind
the site was steep and prior to commencement of the development it had to be
ensured that there would be no land slippage
·
It could not be
refused as the development complied with the relevant policies
·
The member was glad to see that
condition 9 (withdrawal of
PD rights) had been included in the conditions to ensure that the site would
not be extended having received planning permission
(c) Regarding safeguarding the land at the rear of the site, the Development Control Manager confirmed that it would be possible
to impose a condition to
draw the applicant's attention
to the concern via building regulations
Resolved: To approve in accordance with
the following conditions:
1. Time
2. Compliance with plans
3. Materials / slate
4. To
submit and agree on a Building Control Plan
5. Protecting trees
6. Highways
7. Opaque glass
8. Finished floor levels
9. Removal of PD rights
10. Note on Party
Wall Act
Note: to draw the applicant's
attention to the possibility
of requiring a supporting wall
at the back
Supporting documents: