Agenda item

Report of the Assistant Director Planning.

The Assistant Director Planning – Community Development Services sought determination of the above application which had been deferred by the Planning Committee held on 20 March 25.

This was to allow officers to discuss the following matters with the agent that were identified by Councillors as requiring further attention.

·       Compliance with Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS)

·       The proposed materials

·       The orientation of the proposed flats.

The officer’s presentation provided responses to each of the concerns raised at the previous meeting of the Planning Committee as follows:

·       NDSS - updated plans were provided which demonstrated compliance with the NDSS, with the figures for each flat clearly shown within the plans. The scale of the flats had been slightly increased to show an increase above NDSS of approx. 10% for Flat 1 and 9% for Flat 2. The flats are now considered to comfortably exceed NDSS.

·       Signage, doors and windows - amendments to the scheme were provided with regard to signage, doors and windows. The signage on the Market Place elevation now consists of a single, dark green fascia featuring the company’s name. To the rear, facing Chapel Street, window materials have been changed from aluminium to wood and the doors to the flats and the shop fire escape was to be painted, timber doors in a panelled design.

It was considered that the windows and doors were more sympathetic to the surrounding area. The signage could be more properly examined during an advert application.

·       Orientation - altering the orientation of the residential portion of the flats was discussed with the agent, who stated that the particular layout of the burgage plot would limit the deliverability of the scheme and that re-orientation of the flats to more properly reflect the character of the burgage plot would have the following impacts:

o    A loss of amenity for the flats as their main windows would be a small distance from adjoining buildings.

o    A conflict of use as deliveries for the shop would be made across the front of the flats.

o    A loss of floor area for the shop, which would affect the viability of the proposal.

Officers remained of the view that less-than-substantial harm remained due to the scale, massing and form of the extension and, due to the weight afforded to the heritage asset (the Conservation Area) by both national and local planning policies, this was not entirely balanced out by the economic and social benefits to be derived from the proposal.

Councillor Gareth Dadd, Division Member spoke in support of the application.

Mr Dan Gracy, agent, spoke in support of the application.

During debate Members were satisfied that their concerns had been addressed and were cognisant of the importance of economic value of investment in the town. They felt that the economic benefits outweighed the perceived harm to the conservation area.

Councillor Lindsay Burr proposed and Councillor Alyson Baker seconded that the application be approved.

The Solicitor advised that, as the officer recommendation was for refusal, no conditions were listed in the officer report. Members could propose that they were minded to approve the application and delegate the decision to officers after finalising conditions.

The officer confirmed that it was likely that the conditions would be as standard, covering, amongst other things, materials, plans, layout and drainage details

Decision

That Members were unanimously minded to approve the application and to delegate authority to officers to determine the application subject to the appropriate conditions.

Councillor Dadd left the meeting.