Agenda item

The application has been referred to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Harris due to the proposal representing backland development; overdevelopment of what is a very narrow site; not meeting policy regarding size criteria; inadequate parking for the proposed dwelling and 3 Bentley Road; dangerous access to the road with poor visibility and limited room to manoeuvre; and not having the support of Weeley Parish Council.

 

The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of a three-bedroom detached bungalow with integral single garage and vehicular access onto Mill Lane for parking provision for the proposed bungalow and for two parking spaces for the existing property from which the site would be formed.

Minutes:

Councillor Harris had earlier declared a non-pecuniary interest in Planning Application 20/00525/FUL – Land Adjacent 3 Bentley Road, Weeley, Clacton-on-Sea CO16 9DT due to the fact that he had called  in the application at the request of Weeley Parish Council, and that, in addition, he was  the Ward Member. He had stated however that he was not pre-determined on this application.

 

It was reported that the application had been referred to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Harris due to the Parish Council’s concerns that the proposal represented backland development; overdevelopment of what was a very narrow site; did not meet policy regarding size criteria; provided inadequate parking for the proposed dwelling and 3 Bentley Road; would have a dangerous access to the road with poor visibility and limited room to manoeuvre; and therefore it did not hae the support of Weeley Parish Council.

 

Members were made aware that the application site was formed from part of the rear garden of 3 Bentley Road, Weeley Heath. 3 Bentley Road was at a corner of the junction of Bentley Road with Mill Lane. The site would have a frontage to Mill Lane.

 

The site was located within a Development Boundary for Weeley Heath as defined within both the adopted Tendring District Local Plan 2007 and the emerging Tendring District Local Plan 2013-2033 and Beyond Publication Draft 2017. The principle of residential development in this location was therefore considered to be acceptable by Officers subject to detailed design and impact considerations.

 

The application sought full planning permission for the erection of a three-bedroom detached bungalow with integral single garage and vehicular access onto Mill Lane for parking provision for the proposed bungalow and for two parking spaces for the existing property from which the site would be formed.

 

Officers felt that the proposed bungalow would be of a scale and form appropriate to its setting. The bungalow would not result in a material loss of residential amenities. The bungalow would have a private garden and parking in accordance with relevant standards.

 

Officers also felt that the proposed development was in a location supported by Local Plan policies and would not result in any material harm to the character of the area, residential amenities or highway safety. The application was therefore recommended by Officers for approval subject to conditions and in conjunction with a completed legal agreement.

 

The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval subject to conditions and in conjunction with a completed legal agreement.

 

At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Team Leader (TF) in respect of the application.

 

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of three additional representations received:

 

“1)       Letter of support received from occupier of 3 Bentley Road.

           I would be most affected but see no problem;

           Space has not been utilised for a number of years now;

           One bungalow would not impact on area;

           It is not a greenfield site or backland;

           I have enjoyed easy access for parking from the street for my whole time here; and

           Infilling of this type should be promoted by the Council as it negates the need for more large developments

 

2)         Letter of support received from owner of 3b Bentley Road.

           It would embellish a prominent part of the area which is currently unsightly due to a run down outbuilding for a single bungalow;

           This is not backland development; it fronts the road and already has access; and

           There are plenty of precedents where plots like this have been granted planning permission

 

3)         Letter of comment received from occupier of 64 Bentley Road.

           Weeley Heath is in danger of losing its identity;

           Proposal should be viewed positively as it removes what is essentially an eyesore;

           The plot though small is not out of keeping with similar developments;

           It is not backland development but has a full road frontage and is essentially infill;

           It will enhance the streetscene;

           It is within the accepted development area and appears to be sympathetic to adjacent             properties;

           It uses an existing highway access; and

           We cannot be against all developments or we will lose our ability to be taken seriously when trying to object to large scale incursions which would have a dramatic effect on the landscape”

 

Colin Crane, a local resident, spoke against the application.

 

Parish Councillor Christine Hamilton, representing Weeley Parish Council, spoke against the application.

 

Following discussion by the Committee, it was moved by Councillor Harris, seconded by Councillor Codling and RESOLVED that, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation of approval, the Acting Assistant Director (Planning) (or equivalent authorised officer) be authorised to refuse planning permission for the development due to the following reasons:-

- The design of the bungalow, by reasons of its position, scale and massing in relation to the cramped nature of the plot and failure to relate well to surrounding development in terms of the grain and rhythm of built forms, fails to represent good design as required by paragraph 124 of the National Planning Policy Framework and is contrary to Policies QL9 and HG14 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy SPL3 of the emerging Local Plan.

 

- The design of the bungalow, involving bedroom windows looking onto side boundaries, would create development with insufficient amenity for future occupiers and a loss of privacy for occupiers of neighbouring properties and as such is contrary to Policies QL10 (v) and QL11 (ii) of the adopted Local Plan and Policy SPL3 of the emerging Local Plan.

 

- In the opinion of the local planning authority the proposal would cause a hazard and inconvenience to the public by reason of the four parking spaces directly accessing onto a highway in proximity to a junction and as such the proposal is contrary to Policies TR1a and QL10 (i) and Policy CP2 of the emerging Local Plan.

Supporting documents: