Agenda item

Erection of dwelling (resubmission of 6/2013/0397/DM)

Consideration was given to the report of the Principal Planning Officer regarding an application for the erection of dwelling (resubmission of 6/2013/0397/DM) (for copy see file of Minutes).

A Caines, Principal Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the application which included photographs of the site. Members had visited the site and were familiar with the location and setting.

In presenting the report the Officer advised that in assessing the impact of the proposed development on the setting and significance of the surrounding heritage assets, consideration had been given to Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the revised proposals were deemed to be acceptable.

Mr Kirtley addressed the Committee on behalf of his son who lived at the adjacent Peartree Cottage. He explained that the driveway was in the ownership of his son’s property but the developer had rights of access across it. This was the only access to the rear entrance door of the cottage and the garden, and he was concerned for the safety of his grandchildren who played there.  He believed that the access would not only be used by family cars but by larger vehicles such as horse boxes.

The access also crossed the village green and to overcome this grasscrete had been laid to protect the surface. However this was for use by light vehicles and he believed that larger vehicles would have a detrimental impact on the surface.

The developer owned the property to the west of the site which had a large concrete area and he suggested that this be divided into two separate driveways, one of which could be used as an access to the proposed development.

Mr Ridgeon, the applicant’s agent stated that this resubmission application aimed to address the previous reasons for refusal. The proposals respected the historical importance of the site and was set back from the dry stone wall along the frontage. The site was within the development limits of Hamsterley and took into account the character of the village. The revised proposals were reduced in scale and were deemed to be acceptable in Design and Conservation terms.

The access was considered to be acceptable by the Highways Authority, there would be no damage to the surface of the village green and vehicles would be travelling at slow speeds. These access arrangements were not unusual across the County and was a civil matter.

A full heritage assessment had been carried out and whilst the comments of the Landscape Section were noted he reiterated that there were no objections from Design and Conservation.

There was a recognised need for new housing in County Durham and this form of development in rural areas was supported by Planning Policy. There was also a recognised need for bungalow accommodation. 

The Highways Officer advised that an assessment of the access had concluded that it was acceptable in terms of highway safety, and confirmed that right of access was a civil matter.

Councillor J Buckham noted that the Parish Council had called the application to Committee and expressed disappointment that they were not represented. Having looked at the site and considered the effort put into the design by the developer he was of the view that it was an exceptionally high quality in-fill development with an unassuming impact, and located in a popular village.  The proposals would not obscure the views enjoyed by Peartree Cottage.

Councillor Richardson advised that he lived in the village and expressed disappointment that the recent owners of Peartree Cottage had chosen to object to the application. Concerns put forward had been addressed and the applicant had revised the application to the satisfaction of Planning Officers, as outlined in the report.

Councillor Clare noted that there were other new developments taking place in this area which were close to the site. The design was exemplary and although he was generally not in favour of in-fill development this application fully accorded with the NPPF and Policy 15 of the emerging County Durham Plan.

It was moved by Councillor Buckham and seconded by Councillor Davidson that the application be approved.

Resolved:

That that the application be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report.