Agenda item

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for three detached houses with detached garages on vacant land between 11 and 37 Church Drive, East Keswick, LS17.

(Report attached)

This application sought approval for three detached dwellings within this greenfield site. The dwellings would be of a traditional design, constructed of stone and slate. The dwellings would be laid out over two floors featuring three bedrooms to the first floor and kitchen, dining, lounge and a study at ground level. The footprint of the dwelling would measure 8m by 7m. Each dwelling would be served by a drive which would lead to a single detached garage. Residential garden space would be located to the rear of the site.

The application was brought to Panel at the request of Cllr. Rachael Procter who was of the view that the proposal would harm the character of the area.

Some Members had attended the site visit earlier in the day. Plans and photographs were shown at the meeting.

Members noted the following points:

·  The area around the site had a number of residential developments and is located close to the core of East Keswick.

·  In 2008 an outline application to erect residential development was approved

·  In 2011 an extension of time for the 2008 application was approved this had now expired.

·  The redline site plan had been reduced slightly as this had been inaccurate

·  Small saplings planted by Parks and Countryside would be removed and could be reused.

·  The dwellings would have stone built chimneys and garages would also be of stone.

·  Dwellings are built in a mixture of materials but are predominantly built of stone.

·  No impact on the conservation of the area as the development fits well with the design of the village

·  The flats on either side of the development have no off street parking, however. Highways were of the opinion that there was enough on street parking.

·  Plans for driveway width have been revised to show 3m due to concerns raised by Highways.

The panel were informed that the application had received 21 letters of objection which included loss of trees, impact on neighbours, impact on the character of the area.

The Panel heard from two objectors who informed the Members of the following:

·  Believe that the development had been designed for profit

·  The village want and need more affordable homes and flats

·  Parking is already a problem and this will be made worse

·  Scale and design not in keeping with the area

·  Development would encroach on properties already there

·  The need for smaller two bed homes in the area

·  Schools in the area already at capacity

·  No general store nearby so a car is essential

·  The need to keep the green space for children to play

·  If development goes ahead would only be able to see red brick and cars

·  The development is not for local people

·  Want to preserve the area for future generations

In response to questions from Members the objectors told the Panel that the current the properties closest to the development see trees and green space. If the development was to go ahead all that would be seen would be bricks and cars as the boundary line would go across the ground floor window.

The objectors also responded to Members questions saying that they had only received consultation on the outline application. There had been no engagement with the developers.

The objectors said that this was the only bit of green space as there is no village green. They also said that this development was larger than expected.

The agent for the developers spoke to the Panel saying that planning permission had been granted in 2008 and renewed in 2011. There was nothing at that stage about affordable housing. He stated that this development was for 3 three bedroom houses not executive homes.

The agent informed the Members that stone had been chosen for the development as it was close the centre of East Keswick. He also informed the Panel that the development was incompliance with LCC Policy ‘Neighbourhoods for living’

The agent was asked if he was aware of the emerging Neighbourhood Plan and the fact that this was not what was wanted but, that there was a need for 1 and 2 bedroom properties.

It was also noted that the previous application had been for 2 bungalows.

In response the agent said that when the Neighbourhood Plan is adopted it cannot put on the developers the type of dwellings to be built.

In response to the process of consultation he said that it was not necessary as per LCC guidelines for this size of development. Public displays need only take place for a development of 10 dwellings or more.

Members discussed the following issues:

·  Overshadowing

·  Parking

·  Boundary treatment

·  Suitability and viability of different property types on that space

·  Flood alleviation

·  Alignment of the development in relation to existing buildings

·  Tree retention

RESOLVED – Members resolved that this be deferred for one cycle. Members were accepting that this site can be developed for residential use but were concerned about the number and size of units, drainage, parking and openness of the site.