Tag: APP/13/00398

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Continues from Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage.

Cllr Alan Brighouse: because she has a petition of over twenty-five signatories, could she speak?

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): No, well, I gave her, I gave her the opportunity before.

Petitioner: I actually put this on ….

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): I gave the option, if the petitioner wanted to speak before and the ward councillor came forward first, I’m sorry.

Petitioner: I particularly …

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): Right I’m, I’m, ….

Petitioner … wanted to speak to the errm

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): I’m awfully sorry, errm the chance was given in my estimation which you didn’t take so I’m awfully sorry errm,

Petitioner (whispers): It’s terrible.

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): It’s up to the Committee, I’m going to throw it open to the Committee, I, I, I gave the petitioner the chance that she could come up and address the Committee…

Petitioner: No I did, I did.

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): OK, errm right well the Committee has said there’s no problem, so you can you come forward to address the Committee?

Petitioner: Thank you very, very much.

1:00

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Continues from Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage.

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): Errm, open to err debate? Has anybody got anything to say about that?

Cllr Phil Brightmore: The single … of the talk to the meeting by Cllr Brighouse.. terms of exactly what, what relevance, can we give to past planning decisions that have effect?

Matthew Rushton: Errm through you Chair, I think I’ll answer the second point first as that’s probably the easiest to answer. Errm all planning applications have to be assessed on their individual merits. So, whilst planning history is relevant if its a material consideration each individual application has to be considered on its individual merits.

So in the past officers, the Committee and the errm Inspectorate have taken the view that previous applications that have dealt with the same are dealt with on their individual merits. It was right to say there was an application not so long ago for a considerably larger garage errm which was forward to the building line. Err in fact it sat just about here errm on the plot and errm in terms of its size it reflected pretty much the broad area of the existing house of the of the existing house but what… and so it was right that it was refused and it was right that that was dismissed at appeal.

This is a much smaller garage errm with a sloping roof err to the side of the property, errm I think Cllr Brighouse talked about errm a 40%, 90% increase. It’s probably in between that so … Errm going forward, the adjacent property at number thirteen, errm what you see on the plan is the original outline, that’s the outline of the original development. The occupiers of that property extended the conservatory to the side of that errm to the side of that dwelling so it essentially runs out here down the side of the boundary and there’s a small loop to the back.

Those Members who were at the site visit on errm Tuesday would’ve seen that there’s quite a high fence that runs along the boundary and there is some vegetation that grows over the top of that fence and there is a large tree that sits in the garden of number thirteen which creates darkness to that conservatory anyway.

I think that Matt made reference to his presentation the direction of the sun throughout the day. Errm this garage this garage wouldn’t impact on errm on any light or sunlight in the conservatory more than what exists at present, so that’s why we’ve taken the view that errm in this instance because of the location of the garage it wouldn’t have any impact on the amenities of thirteen, but I think that it’s important to clarify that the occupiers have almost if you like prejudiced themselves by extending on the side of their property with a conservatory and shouldn’t necessarily be used to prejudiced against neighbours when they want to extend as well.

Err just one final point to make it is that there is considerable history on this site, errm but there have been considerable changes to planning policy, not least the National Planning Policy Framework and as you know as it err came to the last Committee. The Government are doing all they can to encourage households to extend their own homes by relaxations to the permitted development rights. This doesn’t fall within the PD rights because it’s a side extension rather than a rear extension, errm but hopefully that decision …

Cllr Alan Brighouse: Chair?

Continues at Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Continues from Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage.

Cllr Alan Brighouse: Thank you Chair, errm, I just, basically I have two concerns with regards to this err this sort of proposal. One relates to the err planning history and only in as much as the planning history is relevant to the application we have before us, there’s a considerable planning history and I would like to say something about that and the other is err my other concern is the impact of the proposal on the adjacent property at number thirteen Templemore Road.

I think clearly this should be stopped on that particular issue, clearly I think understandably to the next door neighbour errm that this err proposal does conflict with errm HS11 because if you are putting up a garage and a house extension, which is in conflict with the policy as I understand it. You’ll know far better than I do that the house extension should be designed in such a way that there are no significant adverse affect on the amenities of neighbouring properties. Given the slope of the road and the fact that the next door property is slightly lower almost, you can’t fail to say that it represents an unneighbourly development. That said my other concern is that it will add err probably forty percent to the footprint of this house and I think that is a key consideration, err particularly when we look at some of the previous applications that err have been brought forward to this property.

It was errm the oddest place to put a garage, which is actually when you’re standing in the road, it’s actually to the left hand side of the property and an application was came before the Committee for a garage on that site. It was refused by this Committee and then it was subsequently over to the Planning Inspectorate who also err did not approve a garage and the reason that he gave, principally he had two reasons, one which is not relevant to this what we’re looking at with this application we’re looking at today, that the proposed garage was out of the building line but his second reason errm and in fact he gave in conclusion and again if you allow me I’ll just read to you what the Planning Inspector said.

He said and this is referring not to this garage obviously but the previous application, “I find in conclusion, I find that the proposed garage would be out of scale with the existing houses, would be an uncharacteristic feature of the street scene, it would be prominent and would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area around Templemore Road. On this basis it would not preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.”

Now this is a different garage and I wouldn’t pretend that it’s not for one moment, but errm I think it is important that err the garage is going to add forty percent. It’s it’s it’s certainly an argument to declare if you put the errm the reasons that the Planning Inspector gave for refusal only as recently as September could be applied this particular application and I also think if you just look at the whole history of applications on this site and again I don’t think there’s as far as … the application.

In errm 1981 there was an application for a house and garage I think and there was a house and garage but we didn’t know what we… and then in 1999 there was an application for a house on this site and that was refused. It was refused partly because of trees again which is not relevant to this application but it was refused on the grounds that it was errm it was setting the property on a on a plot with the elevated treatment, that does not err preserve or enhance neither the Conservation Area or the house that the that the plot the house on which the build, the house that was built on 11 Templemore Road was actually built in garden of the house that is errm in Fairclough Lane.

And it was only in 2002 that the house was finally approved and was a coach house with a side elevation on Templemore Road and it was approved and we can see from the architect’s.. design statement that the footprint of the dwelling is relatively small and then again going forward again in April 2012, this Committee approved an application for a conservatory err on the left hand side and to the rear and my, err this .. goes to the nub of my concern, which is that if you take the conservatory and the garage together, if you were to approve this garage then you’re actually increasing the footprint of this house by ninety percent… and that I think is a considerable increase in its overall size.

Errm and I think that errm I think clearly, clearly its your decision entirely your decision to make, but I think that you do have to be aware are saying that the decisions that were previously made, where either the planning policy CH2, CH7 or HS11 were appropriate as reasons for refusal that they are no longer relevant and that you, you’re making the decision to accept that in effect that we are accepting an erosion of the existing planning policies by allowing this sort of process which would be significantly increasing the size of errm of the footprint.

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): Right, thank you very much.

Continues at Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage.

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage

Continues from Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00574 5 Speedwell Drive, Barnston, CH60 2SY Change of use of garage to dog grooming parlour.

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): OK, errm. Right, the next agenda item number ten please. Can we have a presentation for item number ten?

Matthew Davies: Thank you Chair, there is a qualifying petition for this application.

The proposal is for a single storey garage extension to the dwelling found at the rear of the property. The key issues are the siting and scale of the proposed extension and its impact on the character. The dwelling itself actually remains to the rear of the property. Another feature to consider is that the garage is in a Conservation Area.

Errm the proposal is modest in scale and size and is not considered to dominate the existing dwelling, in fact it is considered that there is a uniform pattern of development in this … but considered a relatively mixed design, mixed spacing. It is noted that there a number of properties in the road which do have side garages, a number of which are also in the Conservation Area creating narrow spacing with the remaining properties.

Errm the development will have some impact on the existing street scene on the road particularly during … but the impacts are not considered to be significant, given that there’s … at the property. the pattern of … of the property. Given that the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions to secure err .. and the materials used in the dwelling, cross sectional drawings proposed although cross sectional drawings … necessary.

Cllr Bernie Mooney (Chair): Thank you, does the petitioner wish to speak, is there a petitioner here? No, alright, thanks for that.

Continues at Planning Committee (Wirral Council) (27th June 2013) APP/13/00398: 11 Templemore Road, Oxton, CH43 2HB – Single Storey Garage.