Planning Committee to decide on plans for 26 flats on site of former Corsair pub in Bidston Village

Planning Committee to decide on plans for 26 flats on site of former Corsair pub in Bidston Village

Planning Committee to decide on plans for 26 flats on site of former Corsair pub in Bidston Village

                                           

John Brace on the site of the former Corsair pub, Bidston Village
John Brace on the site of the former Corsair pub, Bidston Village

The first month I started this blog I wrote a story on the demolition of the Corsair pub at one end of Bidston Village. I finished that piece by stating "I will be making enquiries to see if there are any future plans for the site." The site in 2015 still looks as much of an eyesore as it did when the photo was taken in 2010.

Verum Victum Healthcare Limited (the agents) have applied for planning permission for twenty-six one-bedroom apartments on the site of the former Corsair pub. The planning application will be decided when Wirral Council’s Planning Committee next meets (unless councillors agree to a site visit). You can see elevations for how the agent envisages it would look on Wirral Council’s website. The elevations however don’t show the metal railings around the perimeter to a height of 1.5 metres that are part of the plans.

Such a modern looking building of three stories would be out-of-place in Bidston Village and it’s sad that the designs submitted with the plans aren’t more in keeping with the surrounding area. Although the site of the former pub is just outside the Bidston Village Conservation Area, it borders the Conservation Area on two sides. Across the road to the east is Church Farm and the buildings to the north across the road are set back from the road. None of the buildings nearby are of a similar height.

The sheer size of what is proposed and the design would not be in keeping with the rural nature of this part of Bidston Village and I hope this planning application is refused by Wirral Council’s Planning Committee.

If you click on any of the buttons below, you’ll be doing me a favour by sharing this article with other people.

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.

Port Sunlight Summer Festival Photos 25th August 2012 Yellow Bus, Crowds, Pets as Therapy poodle, Vespas, Nissan Leaf Electric Car and Sue Taylor (Radio Clatterbridge)

Port Sunlight Summer Festival 2012 25th August 2012 Port Sunlight Summer Festival 39 New Ferry via Woodside yellow bus
Port Sunlight Summer Festival 39 New Ferry via Woodside yellow bus

Port Sunlight Summer Festival 2012 25th August 2012 Port Sunlight Summer Festival 44 Crowds
Port Sunlight Summer Festival 44 Crowds

Port Sunlight Summer Festival 2012 25th August 2012 Port Sunlight Summer Festival  77 Pets as Therapy
Port Sunlight Summer Festival 77 Pets as Therapy

Port Sunlight Summer Festival 2012 25th August 2012 Port Sunlight Summer Festival 94 Vespas 4 of 5
Port Sunlight Summer Festival 94 Vespas 4 of 5

Port Sunlight Summer Festival 2012 25th August 2012 Port Sunlight Summer Festival 101 Nissan Leaf Electric Car
Port Sunlight Summer Festival 101 Nissan Leaf Electric Car

Port Sunlight Summer Festival 2012 25th August 2012 Port Sunlight Summer Festival Sue Taylor Radio Clatterbridge stall
Port Sunlight Summer Festival Sue Taylor Radio Clatterbridge stall

Planning Committee – 21/10/2010 (Part 3) – Bebington House in wrong place

The next application to be decided was a retrospective planning application for the erection of a house and garage.

There was no qualifying petition associated with this application. The Chair asked in future that any photos should be displayed before the meeting started. He also mentioned that Cllr Williams had objected to the application earlier at 4.15pm.

An officer talked about the application and that the house had been built too close to a boundary, it should’ve been 5m away but had been 2.2m away, although the original proposal had been approved. An extra condition had been added that the proposed changes had to be made within 9 months.

Cllr Sheila Clarke addressed the committee and talked about an access road that had been made. She pointed out that in some parts this property was as close as 1.25m and that it was unneighbourly. She pointed out it was in a Conservation Area. She said it was disproportionate to the plot size and had no regard to the character of the area. She referred to page 4 of the report and circulated photos. She said there was overshadowing and loss of amenity to the neighbouring property and that a hedge at 2m was not feasible. She also pointed out that other residents had conformed to the Conservation Area requirements.

Cllr Keeley asked if an objective report had been done as to whether it was out of character in a Conservation Area. The Chair said that an independent report had stated that the amended plans didn’t conflict with policy CH2 or the Conservation Area appraisal.

It was pointed out that there were no habitable rooms on the side of the property which had been built too close to the boundary. Cllr Gilchrist asked a question about condition 4 and was told it removes all permitted development rights and that the 9 months to carry out the work was reasonable.

The Chair proposed it for approval. Ten councillors voted for and two against, so it was approved.