Issue - meetings

The Planning Officer confirmed there was one additional letter of objection received which reiterated points set out and addressed in the committee report.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35(b) a member of the public spoke in favour of the application and a member of the public spoke against the application.

Ward Councillor Lisa Hudson spoke to say this site was very over developed and the basement would set a precedent, and was excessive making the property stand out for the wrong reasons.

Councillor Reena Ranger asked where on the plans the development would end underground, and stated there were concerns about flooding and surface water issues.  The Councillor asked if more onsite parking was required as the spaces included in the plans were completely habitable.

The Planning Officer confirmed the property was not in a flood zone, and Thames Water had suggested informatives which would be attached to any grant of permission and would be covered under current building regulations. The site plan showed a large driveway which would provide the required amount of parking spaces and allow for entry and exit to the property in a forward gear. No objections were received from the Highways Officer.

Councillor Reena Ranger asked if a future application to extend the basement the full length of the garden would that be classed as over development as it would be underground?

The Planning Officer confirmed this would be assessed on its own merits should an application be received.

Councillor David Raw was concerned about the basement and potential damage to nearby properties due to the amount of digging required. Councillor Raw asked if it would be out of character with the area to have two properties so close to one another.

The Planning Officer said that as this was a second application the principal of the subdivision had already been granted, and there was no increase in the footprint apart from the increase to the ground floor rear projection. Concerns about nearby damage isn’t a material planning concern that would be for building regulations. Neighbours have the ability to seek independent advice if they have further concerns.

Councillor Alex Hayward asked if the dimensions on the existing permission was the same as the current application.

The Planning Officer confirmed this as the case, with the addition of the basement and the increase to the single storey rear extension, removal of garages and additional of a front porch. The width, siting of the main dwellings and distances to boundaries were as previously approved

Councillor Reena Ranger said she didn’t have an issue with basements but would it be reasonable to remove permitted development rights?

The Planning Officer said that officers didn’t think that was reasonable but this could be added if Members requested.

Councillor Alison Scarth said it was disappointing there was no contribution to affordable housing.

Councillor Chris Lloyd asked how enforceable the informatives were, particularly I9 and I10?

The Planning Officer said that these were new informatives included for this application. As  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20