Agenda item

N/2019/1212 - Reserved Matters Application pursuant to Outline Planning Permission N/2018/0710 (Outline planning application for 14 residential dwellings with all matters reserved except access) for the approval of details of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. Land off Mill Lane, Dallington

Minutes:

The Development Management Team Leader submitted a report to the Committee. Members’ attention was drawn to the addendum which contained comments from the Wildlife Trust, amended Conditions 8 and 10, and additional Condition 16, and advised that the Highway Authority had confirmed that an Order was to be imposed on a section of Mill Lane reducing the speed limit to 30mph with additional street lighting being required as part of the S278 works associated with the development. The Committee heard that access from Mill Lane had been agreed through a previously approved Outline Planning Application. A number of the proposed dwellings would be facing the internal access road and a distance of at least 21m between new and existing properties would be achieved where required. Details of boundary treatments would be agreed through a condition. Access to the adjacent pond, which was not part of the application site, would be restricted to residents of the development. Trees central to the site which were protected by TPOs were to be removed whilst protected trees towards the edge of the site would remain. Following concerns raised by neighbours, the height of Plot 14 had been lowered and the design amended to be a hipped roof with a single storey garage adjacent to the neighbouring boundary. It was explained that from the rear gardens of Corran Close, only the top section of the garage would be visible with the 2-storey element set approximately 16.5m away from the nearest existing rear elevations.

 

Councillor G Eales, in his capacity as the Ward and County Councillor, spoke against the application and commented that security on site would be lacking; he noted that the boundary wall was falling down in places and stated his insistence that it be rebuilt by the developers. He commented that Plot 14 was still intrusive to residents on Corran Close and further noted that the Wildlife Trust raised concerns regarding the proximity to trees.  Agreed that Plot 14 would be overlooking existing properties and suggested that it be removed from the application. Councillor Eales advised that he had requested a meeting with the developers before Christmas; this had not happened but he was still keen to meet them. He asked that the item be deferred, if Plot 14 was to remain.

 

In response to a question, Councillor Eales agreed that the drop in ground level for Plot 14 was an improvement, however it would still be intrusive to nearby properties.

 

Raymond Dumont, a local resident, spoke against the application and disagreed with the report’s assertion that there would be no unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties, whilst it acknowledged that there would be some overlooking, Mr Dumont stated that the report minimised the extent of overlooking that would take place. He further stated that the gradient of the site meant that distances should be further than 21m between new and existing properties. Mr Dumont further questioned how 4 and 5-bedroom dwellings represented a “mix” of different sized homes, as referenced in Policy 13 of the Local Plan Part 2.

 

Matt Collerson, the agent on behalf of the applicant, spoke in favour of the application and commented that concerns had been addressed, including boundary treatment and explained that Plot 14 had been redesigned, following objections; he stated that Plot 14 would be much lower than adjacent properties and being located to the north there would be no overshadowing of gardens from the property.

 

In response to a question, Mr Collerson explained that he had not met with residents, but knew that the case officer had.  The scheme had been amended and the design complied with policy.

The Development Management Team Leader confirmed that details of the security gates would be secured by condition. She further explained that the boundary wall, which was owned by the applicant, would be repaired as necessary and details of boundary treatments agreed by condition. It was explained that the Arboricultural Officer had confirmed that Plots 13 and 14 could be constructed without causing damage to the nearby protected trees. The Development Management Team Leader further confirmed that the Local Plan Part 2 had not yet been adopted by the Council.

 

Members discussed the report.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and reasons as set out in the report and Amended Conditions 8 and 10 and Additional Condition 16 in the addendum.

Supporting documents: