Public reports pack PDF 9 MB - Gravesham Borough Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Page 24 Cllr Susan Howes Cllr A Moore Cllr K Jones Cllr R Theobald Cllr J Burden Cllr R Bowman Apologies were received from: Cllr Jane Cribbon Cllr C Broadley In Attendance: Mr P Price, Principal Planner Mr R Hart, Senior Planner Mr Mark Durbidge, 313 Wrotham Road (Applicant) Mr Martin Foster, 363 Wrotham Road (Developer) Fraser Tugby, Tugby and Tugby Surveyors (Applicants Agent) Mr S Downes, Downes Planning Partnership Mr & Mrs Waller, 305 Wrotham Road Mrs Clements, 309 Wrotham Road Mrs South 303 Wrotham Road Cllr Craske introduced the Councillors and explained the purpose of the site visit being to assess the impact of the development on neighbouring properties. Mr Price outlined the proposals. He advised that the application was reported to the last Board meeting and officers’ recommendation was for permission. He advised that at the Board meeting Mr Downes of the Downes Planning Partnership spoke against the proposal on behalf of the neighbours either side at nos 305 and 309. Mrs Waller of 305 also spoke against the application. He advised that the objectors raised a number of concerns • criticism of the accuracy of the drawings • development out of character • it would be three storey, resulting in overlooking and loss of sunlight • it would not conform to the building line • it would create a terrace effect. He pointed out that the existing bungalow, which dates from the 1920s, sits between chalet bungalows either side. There is garaging at the rear of the existing dwelling. He advised that the proposal is to demolish the bungalow and erect a two storey five bed dwelling with rooms in the roof space, effectively creating a third storey. The new dwelling would have an integral garage. REPORT NO PAGE 2
Page 25 He explained that ground levels on the site would be reduced by 500mm to lessen the impact of the development so that the ridge height of the dwelling would be 1ft above no 309 (to the south) and 6ft above 305 to the north. He pointed out that the site falls away at the rear and the dwelling would be split level. He advised that the case officer did negotiate with the applicant to reduce the impact of the dwelling reducing both its height and the depth of the rear projections. He explained that the dwelling was assessed in terms of the normal tests in terms of impact on privacy and amenity and did meet the tests. He pointed out that the proposed dwelling would be set in from the side boundaries by 500mm on the north side and 650mm on the south side as scaled from the drawing. He acknowledged that this is closer than the current dwelling on the southern boundary and that there is a bedroom window in the side of 309 Wrotham Road. He advised that although there were windows in the side elevations of the proposed replacement dwelling they would be to non habitable rooms or would be obscured glazed. He pointed out that there has been concern expressed about the dormer in the side of the front projecting wing to bedroom 3. In his view this appeared to be superfluous and he felt that this could be negotiated out of the proposals. In conclusion he considered that there is not an overriding objection to a replacement dwelling on the plot per se. He suggested that the devil is very much in the detail and for Board Members the judgement was whether the overall bulk and size would either harm the living conditions of adjoining residents or would be out of character with the street scene. Councillor Jones noted that the report says it would marginally fail the 45 0 test and sought an explanation. Mr Hart advised that this was only on the basis of the test being from the edge of the window but the normal method is to measure from the mid point of the window in which case the proposal would meet the test. Cllr Theobald advised that he would like to hear from the applicants. He asked whether the scheme was speculative and asked what had informed the design. Mr Foster (Developer) advised that the proposed dwelling was like similar dwellings further down the road. It was two and half storey. He considered that the dormer at the front was in keeping with the chalet style of the dwelling and added a feature but could accept its removal if required. Councillor Theobald asked why the new building was not going to be set in from the sides like others in the street. Mr Foster advised that there would be a distance of 8ft between the dwelling at 309 Wrotham Road to the south and the side wall of the proposed replacement dwelling. Councillor Theobald asked the applicant what scope there was for negotiation. Mr Foster advised that he doesn’t want a separate garage in the front and he therefore could not reduce the size of the dwelling if he was to retain an integral garage. He REPORT NO PAGE 3
Page 1 and 2: Public Document Pack Regulatory Boa
Page 3 and 4: Page 1 Agenda Item 2 Regulatory Boa
Page 5 and 6: Page 3 Regulatory Board 27.05.2009
Page 13 and 14: Page 11 Agenda Item 5a 125 Applicat
Page 15 and 16: Page 13 • Pair of semi detached t
Page 17 and 18: Page 15 John Collins (David Hicken
Page 19 and 20: Page 17 Consultation expiry date: 2
Page 21 and 22: Lodge The TheBanks FarcombeHall 12.
Page 23 and 24: Page 21 GR/09/144 - Former Chequers
Page 25: Page 23 Agenda Item 5b 8 week date
Page 29 and 30: Page 27 Members looked at the plot
Page 31 and 32: 1 Page 29 6 lSubSta 45 48 301 56.7m
Page 33 and 34: Page 31 GR/09/192 - 307, Wrotham Ro
Page 35 and 36: Page 33 Agenda Item 5c 8 week date
Page 37 and 38: Page 35 4 th Floor 9no. rooms serve
Page 39 and 40: Page 37 6. Consultations and Public
Page 41 and 42: Page 39 Mr L F Ascott 134 Parrock S
Page 43 and 44: Page 41 G Humphrey Marco Manente Ma
Page 45 and 46: Page 43 Impact upon Upper Windmill
Page 47 and 48: Page 45 residents lounges it is lik
Page 49 and 50: Page 47 Whilst the principle of a h
Page 51 and 52: Page 49 9. The rating level of the
Page 53 and 54: House CLARENCEROW SHEPPYPLACE Willi
Page 55 and 56: Page 53 Agenda Item 5d 8 week date
Page 57 and 58: Page 55 5. Reason for Report Previo
Page 59 and 60: House CLARENCEROW SHEPPYPLACE Willi
Page 61 and 62: Page 59 Agenda Item 5e 8 week date
Page 63 and 64: Page 61 4 th Floor 9no. rooms serve
Page 65 and 66: Page 63 or identified environmental
Page 67 and 68: Page 65 Commercial Refuse Arrangeme
Page 69 and 70: Page 67 David Bond Claire Grehan Mr
Page 71 and 72: Page 69 hostel then planning permis
Page 73 and 74: Page 71 amenity of the adjoining re
Page 75 and 76: Page 73 Buildings Regulations/Fire
Page 77 and 78:
Page 75 9. The rating level of the
Page 79 and 80:
House CLARENCEROW SHEPPYPLACE Willi
Page 81 and 82:
Page 79 Agenda Item 5f 8/13 week da
Page 83 and 84:
Page 81 (reference Ar.08/3) which c
Page 85 and 86:
Page 83 Consultation expiry date: 0
Page 87 and 88:
29 45 12 3 ROYALPIERROAD 1to12 26 1
Page 89 and 90:
GR/09/424 - 5, Clarendon Road, Grav
Page 91 and 92:
Page 89 Agenda Item 5g 8 week date
Page 93 and 94:
Page 91 which falls within the Boro
Page 95 and 96:
Page 93 Consultation expiry date: 1
Page 97 and 98:
Page 95
Page 99 and 100:
Page 97 GR/09/410 - Copperfield, Wr
show all

Public reports pack PDF 9 MB - Gravesham Borough Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?