Agenda item

We considered the report of the application, and late correspondence, which was recommended for approval subject to the six conditions as outlined in the report and subject to a Section 106 legal agreement.

Consideration of the application had been deferred at the Planning Committee meeting on 4^th December 2018, to ensure that public speaking at Committee takes place at the January 2019 meeting. The application is re-presented for consideration.

Subject to approval, officers had recommended that a further condition be added that foul drainage is considered at reserved matters stage.

Councillor M. Beattie, representing Caerwent Community Council, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

·         26 formal objections to the application have been received with zero support for the application from residents.

·         The Community Council strongly disagrees with the Highways comment in the report which states that the creation of an additional dwelling off Well Lane would not represent a shortfall in highways standards that would lead to real deterioration in highways security or capacity.

·         This is a narrow lane bordered on one side by a three to four foot culvert with a water course running along it and is a major feature of the village. If bridged by a new covered culvert, it would have to be of a substantial width splay in order to avoid vehicles trespassing onto other properties.

·         Highways officers had indicated that the department would not agree to such a new access.

·         Residents who use the existing shared access have indicated that they would not agree to additional traffic relating to construction or a new dwelling across their shared access. There is a major issue which would need to be addressed at reserved matters stage.

·         The Community Council disagrees with the Highways Department and questions the data. It questioned whether a traffic and footfall survey had been undertaken, whether consideration had been taken regarding there being a care home business at the top of the lane which creates daily commercial and visitor traffic.

·         A neighbouring property is stated to be 23 metres from the new building and is now nine metres high.  The angle of sight from the neighbouring property will be 25 degrees in height which is considered to be overbearing. The Planning officer’s summary states there will be no overbearing impact. The Community Council strongly disagrees.

·         The Community Council requested that the Planning Committee considers refusing the application based on the information outlined.

Having considered the views expressed, the following points were noted:

·         Late correspondence confirmed that the maximum height parameter for the proposed dwelling had been amended from 12 metres to 9 metres.

·         The concept of the parameters was explained in that legislation provides maximum and minimum parameters.  Therefore, the proposed dwelling could be between 8m x 8m and 14m x 14m.  Consideration of the application was for outline permission.  Subject to approval, the design of the dwelling would be considered under reserved matters at a future Planning Committee meeting.

·         In response to a question raised regarding the Committee’s options in respect of the parameters, it was noted that if it was considered that the higher parameter was too large, a condition could be imposed to restrict the maximum parameter.

·         The maximum parameter of 14m x 14m was 17% of the area of the plot.

·         One additional property would not significantly increase traffic flow in the area.

·         Some Members considered that the height parameters were too large.  Scale parameters for the height of the building could be reduced to a maximum of 8 metres and a minimum of 7 metres.

·         Some Members considered that a highways condition was required for a single access serving the two points.  It was noted that the access would be a reserved matter.  Therefore, a separate highways condition was not required at this stage.

·         In terms of comments raised regarding the character of the area, it was noted that there is a mix of properties varying in size within the area.

·         In response to a Member’s question requesting a condition for a cesspit, it was noted that a condition was required for the approval of foul and surface water drainage as part of the reserved matters, which would incorporate the issues raised in respect of the cesspit.

It was proposed that application DC/2018/01143 be approved subject to the six conditions as outlined in the report and subject to a Section 106 legal agreement. Two additional conditions to be added, namely:

·         To require approval of foul and surface water drainage as part of the reserved matters.

·         That scale parameters for the height of the proposed dwelling are a maximum of 8 metres and a minimum 7 metres in height.

Upon being put to the vote, the following votes were recorded:

In favour of the proposal    -           13

Against the proposal           -           0

Abstentions                           -           0

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that application DC/2018/01143 be approved subject to the six conditions as outlined in the report and subject to a Section 106 legal agreement. Two additional conditions to be added, namely:

• To require approval of foul and surface water drainage as part of the reserved matters.

• That scale parameters for the height of the proposed dwelling are a maximum of 8 metres and a minimum 7 metres in height.