Agenda item

Application for renewal of extant planning permission 6/2008/0086/DM for erection of detached dwelling

6/2011/0038/DM – Application for renewal of extant planning permission 6/2008/0086/DM for erection of detached dwelling at Brookside Hall, Evenwood (deferred from last meeting for a site visit)

The Principal Planning Officer (A Caines) presented a report on the above application; the written report was supplemented by a visual presentation which included photographs of the site. It was noted that a site visit had taken place the previous day.

The Committee was addressed by Mrs Stout (objector), who claimed that the issue of sewage had not been considered at the time of the original application in 2008 and that the sewerage system could not cope with another dwelling – in fact there were already problems following the erection of ‘Joss House’. Environmental Health Officers had been called out on numerous occasions following flooding/sewage overflow incidents. She queried who would be responsible if such incidents continued/worsened should an additional property be built. In addition Mrs Stout expressed concern over access to services (gas, telephone, electricity), which were located beneath the application land.

The Chair referred members to a condition regarding foul and surface water drainage that was recommended if planning permission was granted and reminded them that the Principal Planning Officer had confirmed that there had been no significant change in material considerations since planning permission was originally granted in 2008.

Members queried whether it was possible to strengthen the condition relating to foul and surface water drainage and whether the re-routing of services could be conditioned. They were advised that, whilst it would be possible to do the former, the latter was a private matter between the respective land/property owners and a matter for agreement between any prospective developer and the statutory service providers.

Councillor Richardson noted that, in his opinion, the original planning application should not have been approved and that renewal would only perpetuate that mistake.

Councillor Davidson moved that the application be approved subject to conditions; he was seconded by Councillor Taylor.

RESOLVED:

That the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed in the officer’s report to the Committee, including the amendment of condition 8 (foul and surface water drainage) as suggested by the Legal Adviser.