The Chair welcomed people to the Planning Committee meeting and introduced himself as David Elderton. He pointed out the elected councillors would be making decisions but there were also planning officers and legal officers to advise as and if necessary.
The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed.
The Chair asked for any declarations of interest. Cllr Realey declared a prejudicial interest in item 14 as she was referred to, she said she couldn’t recall what she had said but she’d rather stay out.
There were no requests for site visits.
The agenda was rearranged to take into account members of the public present for each item.
The Chair told the petitioner that she had up to five minutes. She introduced herself as Kim of 26 Dibbinsdale Road which was next door to number 24. She also said she was speaking for a Mr & Mrs Kirby of 22 Dibbinsdale Road. She thanked the Planning Committee for the opportunity to address them but said she “would’ve liked the opportunity to see for themselves” the site. She had been told planning officers had assumed she was on holiday, which had not been the case. She said the petitioners can’t see the logic of what was envisaged. She commented on the “sheer size of the development” which she thought was “3.85m not 3.2m, nearly 4m, a double storey with a roof which dominates the line cast by the path of the sun”. She said it decreased the value of their homes, she also felt it was overdevelopment of the property and would lead to lack of privacy.