Update Report for Planning Committee(East): 9Th June 2016

Update Report for Planning Committee(East): 9th June 2016

Committee Planning Manager:Graeme Law

15/00946/REM- (Land South of Campden Road and West of Oldbutt Road)
Additional third party objections received (summarised by case officer)
Pegasus Group, planning agent of Ainscough Strategic Land, have written to the case officer and to members of the committee to advise of their concerns relating to the approach to the access junction and how it will relate to their existing permissions and also with regard to the details of the officers report.
They emphasise that the determination of this application must not prejudice the delivery of permissions to the north of Campden Road and highlight the considerable implications of failing to properly consider the existing permissions access arrangements.
Ainscough do agree however that their concerns can be adequately addressed either through a bespoke legal agreement between the applicant and Ainscough, or a suitable, tightly worded condition.
They remain concerned however that the final recommendation within the officers report requests that authority be delegated to officers to approve the application subject to a number of conditions, which are provided only in precis. Although the recommendation includes reference to a condition which would secure the delivery of appropriate junction arrangements at the appropriate time Ainscough object to the absence of detail in this regard.
Ainscough have provided a condition which they advise would satisfy their concerns in the absence of a legal agreement. They are satisfied for members to resolve to approve the application on the basis of their wording being agreed. Officers have considered the proposed wording however consider that some amendment may be necessary to ensure it is satisfactory in all regards.
The applicant has been copied into Pegasus Group’s above correspondence and they advise that they are agreeable to allowing a further extension of time to allow an appropriately worded condition to be negotiated between the relevant parties if a resolution to grant permission is reached.
Officers view is that it is necessary to determine the application as expeditiously as possible, and that because it is agreed between all parties that the junction arrangements can be appropriately handled by a condition, this approach is therefore to be preferred.
Officers remain satisfied that members may resolve to delegate authority to grant approval subject to the conditions and notes within the report. However it is recommended,that a proviso be added, that condition 6 referred to in the officers report, shall be subject to final negotiations to ensure that the approved developments north of Campden Road are not prejudiced. Final determination of the application shall occur only following agreement of the committee chair and that if a Notice of Decision is not issued within 3 months from the date of this committee then the application shall be referred back to this committee for further consideration.
Finally, the applicant has advised that, outside of the planning process, the legal agreement which is expected between the two parties is very close to completion (if it is in place prior to the committee members will be verbally updated in this regard).
16/00347/REM–39 London Road, Shipston on Stour
Additional third party representations received (summarised by case officer)

Loss of trees will be detrimental to the privacy of neighboring property
Layout of the site leaves no room for landscaping on north/east boundaries of neighbour
Side facing upper floor window of neighbouring property is a primary source of light based on the fact it is larger in size than the front facing window serving the same room
Harmful loss of light will therefore be caused to this window by the development
The garage of the property was built at the same time as the house (c.1930) with later first floor extension above built c.1960’s

Officer note
The revised layout plan indicates the removal of the boundary vegetation to the north, which, on the original plan, was proposed to be retained. The re-positioning of the access drive to address the previous reason for refusal necessitates the need to remove that extent of vegetation. It is noted that the site is neither within a conservation area, nor are there any TPO’s within the site and these trees could be removed at any time. On balance, it is officers’opinion that the removal of this vegetation would not lead to unacceptable visual harm. In view of the separation distances involved between the proposed dwellings and the existing dwellings that flank either side of the development site, it would not give rise to unacceptable levels of harm to neighbouring amenity either.
16/00639/FUL–39 London Road, Shipston on Stour
Correction to report (p.41)
Under the heading ‘Impact on neighbouring amenity’, para.2, should read “the new dwellings would have a gabled roof”
Additional third party representations received (summarised by case officer)

Loss of trees will be detrimental to the privacy of neighboring property
Layout of the site leaves no room for landscaping on north/east boundaries of neighbour
Side facing upper floor window of neighbouring property is a primary source of light based on the fact it is larger in size than the front facing window serving the same room
Harmful loss of light will therefore be caused to this window by the development
The garage of the property was built at the same time as the house (c.1930) with later first floor extension above built c.1960’s

Page 1 of 2