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 25th October 2011 Agenda Item 6 APP/11/00834 Part 3

Cllr David Elderton asked officers to respond on demolition & security, parking & access. The officer said Wright Street had been raised in the past. There was a lack of space and there had previously been waiting restrictions. The restrictions had been removed for extra parking spaces. The view expressed was that one more property would not lead to much extra highway demand. Access to the garage was dependent on whether it was used as a garage or storage. The size of any vehicle would also affect access. If a vehicle was obstructing the way out the police could take action, however there were no grounds to refuse the application on highway safety as it was already recommended the application be subject to conditions 2 & 5. He said there were no grounds to object to the application on highway safety.

Matthew Rushton said that the issues raised by the petitioner were not planning issues, safety on the site was the Health and Safety Executive‘s responsibility. He said any damage caused by construction was a civil matter between the two parties. Construction could be looked at under the building regulations to make sure it was safely built.

Cllr John Salter said he had been to the Site Visit. He sympathised with the residents, as parking even in the garage if there was a vehicle parked opposite would be “very, very hard”. Cllr Salter understood that it was not under their remit and there was nothing to turn the application down for refusal. He said he supported the application.