The report of the Director of Planning, Building Regulations and Licensing is enclosed.

The Committee considered the report of the Director of Planning, Building Control and Licensing that proposed an outline application with all matters reserved for the erection of one (3 bed) detached dwelling, with associated car parking and landscaping.

This application relates to a rectangular plot of land, approximately 495m² in size,

which is located to the north of nos. 27 to 33 Capenhurst Close. The site is vacant

and remained undeveloped after the Capenhurst Close and Stapleford Close

development (F17127, approved 28 April 1982) was completed in the late 1980s.

The applicant is proposing to erect a three-bed detached dwelling on the site. Eleven

letters of objections have been received, nine in relation to the original proposal,

which was for a pair of dwellings, and two in relation to the proposal now before the

Committee. The main concerns raised include impact on the existing on-street

parking arrangements, residential amenity, pedestrian/highway safety and existing

ecological features.

The Planning Officer had nothing to add to the printed report.

An objector to the application attended and addressed the Committee, stating that they were unhappy with the diagrams relating to the submitted scheme as they included no measurements and were more of a sketch. The objector stated that there were already problems in the area due to traffic on the cul-de-sac. There was a sign against heavy goods traffic and she questioned how construction vehicles would be allowed access, stating that the refuse collection vehicles have difficulty navigating the area. Hospital parking also created issues on the street and the objector stated their right to have 24 hour access for emergency services. Currently, there were pillars at the end of the footpath onto Capenhurst Close to stop motorbikes, quad-bikes and cycles and, if these were removed for construction purposes, the alleyway would become a rat-run. If construction equipment were to be left on-site it would attract vandals and thieves and this was another cause of concern. The objector stated that locals had not been informed of the length of time for any on-site works. In concluding, she stated that traffic was the main concern as the area was already busy.

The Planning Officer stated that this was an outline application, which previously had been for two houses on the site, now reduced to one. The application was in outline and therefore just sought approval for the principle of one house with all details reserved for future applications. All that was being considered today was the application to allow one house on the plot of land. Highways safety had confirmed that the road would not be adversely affected by one new house. Condition 20 within the report covered all aspects of construction vehicles and the associated compound.

Councillor Andrews stated that this was in his Ward and that he knew the area well. He asked the Planning Officer if the consultation for reserve matters application for the build etc. would be shared with local residents.

The Planning Officer confirmed that this would go through a full consultation period.

Councillor Andrews sought further clarification on whether this application would share plans of the house, build materials, construction plan etc.

The Planning Officer confirmed that the designs and layout will be included in a future application. He confirmed that there was a condition for the construction management plan to be submitted, but the developer could be asked for full details of the construction management plan as part of their reserved matters application in future.

Councillor Andrews stated that he wished for anyone to be able to understand the process and checked that, if this application to allow one house to be built on the land was agreed by the Committee today, that any future application to then build the house on the site would come back before the Planning & Highways Committee, should it attracts any objections.

The Planning Officer confirmed Councillor Andrews’ comments regarding future arrangements for any subsequent application.

Councillor Leech requested information on the status of the land for surrounding dwellings, seeking to establish if this was public highway land or private road as action could be taken against vehicles on public land. Councillor Leech acknowledged the concerns of residents regarding construction vehicles.

The Planning Officer stated that the driveways are private and would pertain to private issues between the developer and other neighbouring properties and confirmed that they would liaise with any developer on a construction management plan.

Councillor Leech felt that the construction management plan should refer to the areas concerned as private driveways.

The Director of Planning wished to address an area of concern raised by the resident regarding the bollards at the junction of a footpath and the end of the cul-de-sac which would have to be removed to give access to any future property. The Director of Planning felt that it would be possible to replace a bollard in the future to prevent vehicular access and anti-social behaviour along the footpath. This could be added as a condition should the Committee approve the application.

Councillor Andrews stated that he was not against the proposal for a house on this plot of land but added that the reserved matters application would receive more scrutiny from the Committee. He thanked the Director of Planning for the additional condition regarding a bollard on the footpath and moved the recommendation of Approve with this extra condition attached.

Councillor S Ali seconded the proposal.

Decision 

The Committee resolved to Approve the application, subject to the additional condition suggested by the Director of Planning and as set out in the report submitted.