Issue - meetings

Application for new roof above existing single storey garage / shop storeroom. Proposed extension of height of boundary (west) wall.

Late items received following preparation of main agenda:

Consultations:-

The following objection has been received following the publication of the Committee agenda making the following points:

-    We have had very little time to respond to the proposed amendments.

-    The Officer had complete their committee report and recommendation prior end of the re-consultation period. This raises concern that further comments will not be considered.

-    The tenant of 44 in the commercial unit was not consulted and not made aware of the plans submitted. She is against any such development. She rents the actual unit and the garage area is not under the tenancy agreement.

Application Description

-    The application put in said this was for a new roof but this will also be an enlargement to the existing external garage with walls , it seems to be taken out which currently divide it from the storage space.

-    It is an application which, as identified by the case officer in his report, clause 3.1 and 10.1 ,  involves the extension of a separate garage and change  of use to residential  for the use of the first floor flat- which has not been applied for in the appropriate manner.

-    The case officer  states in 3.1  "The first floor compromises a flat to which this will provide additional living accommodation". We had not been told in the application this was the intention but was what we suspected and we cannot see how this will work and are concerned it will lead to more noise for the houses in Mansion Street. This part of the description was copied into the committee report in error by the case officer. Case Officer Comment: There is living accommodation located above the shop unit below. The application details were taken on face value and it appears that an intervening courtyard (shared with the flat and shop unit) allows use and access to the detached garage/storage unit. Therefore, notwithstanding an application for Lawful (existing) development, the case officer can only deduce the building (garage/storage) has been and can be used  ancillary for the associated mixed use (residential and retail). However a separate living accommodation or annexe living accommodation permission would be subject to a separate planning application to the LPA.

-    Other objections sent to the LPA previously have pointed out that the shop does not use the garage or storage space- this area is not in the rental agreement and the shop does not need it. It is then confusing and contradictory in that 8.13 of the case officer's document then suggests it will be increased storage capacity for the shop. This also contradicts the far more likely idea to use it for residential reasons (3.1).

-    As regards the case officer's report, recommending approval and done before we have even commented - can we please refer you to clause 3.1 which confirms  ...  view the full agenda text for item 415

Application for new roof above existing single storey garage / shop storeroom. Proposed extension of height of boundary (west) wall.

The agent spoke on this application.

Notwithstanding the officer’s recommendation that permission be granted, some members felt that the proposal would have an overbearing impact and would be detrimental to residential amenity and therefore contrary to policy DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies DPD. It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Mullaney and

RESOLVED – permission be refused for the abovementioned reasons.