Agenda item

Demolition of existing cottage and erection of two storey dwelling

Demolition of Existing Cottage and Erection of Two Storey Dwelling

Consideration was given to the report of the Principal Planning Officer (Durham Area) which recommended approval of the application.

The Principal Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation which included photographs of the site. Members had visited the site that day and were familiar with the location and setting.

Members were advised that further representations had been submitted since preparation of the report and a total of 35 objections had now been received to date. The additional representations did not raise any new material objections, however the consultation period had not expired. Therefore if Members were minded to approve the application it was recommended that this be subject to no new material objections being received by the expiry of the consultation period. In the event that new material objections were submitted within this time, delegated authority be granted to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Committee to determine the application.

The Officer also advised that the wording of condition 4 regarding materials/design of windows was to be amended, together with an amendment to paragraph 68 of the report regarding ecology issues. The reference made in the paragraph to The Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc) Regulations should read 2010 and not 1994.

Mr M Brooker spoke on behalf of local residents against the application. He stated that Shincliffe Village had been designated a Conservation Area because of the special architectural interest of the buildings, which included Hall Lane and the location of Sparks Cottage. The proposals did not protect or enhance the Conservation Area and were therefore contrary to Planning Policy E22.  The development was almost double the footprint of the existing dwelling and would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the residents of Wood View. The site did not constitute previously developed land as he understood that private gardens were now excluded from the new definition. He also expressed concern that Members of the Committee did not have an opportunity to consider any new representations made.

J Taylor, the applicant’s architect stated that the existing property was very small and had no architectural merit or historical value. An application for Listed Building status had been refused by English Heritage. The site constituted previously developed land as the footprint extended no further than the existing garage on the site. The overall height of the building would be less than the adjacent two storey house to the north and the footprint would only represent 26% of the overall space. He therefore did not consider that this constituted over development. Separation distances to properties in Wood Terrace were in excess of minimum requirements and this would ensure that there was no loss of privacy. The proposed materials would be traditional and in-keeping with the Conservation Area.

In responding to the comments made, the Principal Planning Officer stated that the existing property was very modest and the scale of the proposed dwelling could easily be accommodated within the site. The materials to be used were traditional and commonly found in Conservation Areas. The mass of the dwelling would be mitigated through the use of single storey elements and the ridge height would be lower than that of the white two storey building to the north of the site, and that of Wood Terrace due to the difference in ground levels.

In determining the application Members acknowledged the need to protect the character of Shincliffe village but felt that the existing bungalow was not of any historic or architectural value, and that a carefully designed building would enhance the Conservation Area.

RESOLVED

(i)                 That the application be approved subject to the following;-

No new material planning considerations being raised by the expiry of the consultation period;

or should any new material objections be received by the expiry of the consultation period delegation be granted to the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Committee to determine the application.

(ii)               Subject to (i) above, approval be granted in accordance with the conditions outlined in the report, with condition 4 being amended to read as follows:-

‘4. Notwithstanding the submitted plans full details (including cross-sections) and materials and colour of all windows, doors and roof lights at a scale of 1:20 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority, prior to development commencing. The submitted details shall demonstrate that windows and doors have a recess of at least 100mm from the outer face of the wall. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.’