Agenda item

Application Proposal: Demolition of single storey extension at 35 Mill Street and two thirds of a garage block along with stone boundary walls. Erection of 3 no. dwellings.

(Councillor Colin Winder declared a personal interest as he lives near to the site)

The Planning Officer presented his report to members with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. He explained that the application was for the erection of three dwellings and pointed out that the application site was situated on a sloping site. He explained that the proposal included two parking spaces at the front for each of the three dwellings and that they would each have small gardens.

Members were shown images of the site and plans to show the proposed dwellings on the presentation.

The Planning Officer explained that he had concerns over the residential amenity for the neighbouring properties and the impact that the proposal would have on the conservation area. He also felt that the proposed garden area for the future owners would be very small.

The applicant addressed the committee. He advised members that the proposal would be in keeping with the area and that the front elevation would be finished with natural stone to match the existing properties. He felt that the garden sizes were adequate and pointed out that residents may not wish to have large garden. He explained that the land behind the application site was within his ownership and advised that the gardens could be extended if this was important.

Councillor Colin Winder, the Ward Member, explained that this was an important street in Wincanton as it was one of the oldest streets in the town. However, he advised that this site had been allocated as development land for many years and hoped that the land would be developed. He felt that more consultation could have resulted in a more positive proposal; however felt that he could not support a refusal of the application.

Councillor Nick Colbert, also Ward Member, explained that he did not like the design of the properties and suggested that the proposed parking arrangements could be dangerous. He was keen to see the natural stone on the site being re-used. He suggested that the application should be deferred to allow the dwellings to be pulled forward and the parking arrangements to be re-configured.

During the discussion, several members commented that they would be keen to see the application deferred to allow the parking spaces to be moved to the rear of the site. The Senior Planning Advisor clarified that should the application site extend outside of the application ‘red line’ site, that the amendment would require a new planning application and would take several weeks to consider.

It was subsequently seconded that the planning application should be deferred to allow the applicant time to amend the application to improve the streetscene and to move the parking spaces to the rear of the site, whilst remaining within the application ‘red line’ site if possible.

On being put to the vote, this was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:  that planning application 18/00942/FUL be deferred to allow officers’ time to seek amendments to the scheme by way of pulling the proposed development forward to the front building line to present a strong street frontage and minimise the amenity impact for neighbouring properties and to provide alternative off street parking.

(Voting: unanimous)