Planning Committee – 25th July 2013

This post summarises my participation in July’s planning committee on Thursday 25th. The list of applications we were considering is available here and the various reports here.

When reading the report for application 13/00540/F at 214 Newmarket Road, I was concerned about the potential loss of biodiversity, since this is a new bungalow in the former back garden of an existing property. I also wanted to be sure that the building of this bungalow would not unduly affect the residential amenity of surrounding property. After seeing photographs and hearing the officer’s report, I was satisfied that the biodiversity was not significantly diminished, nor would the proposed building unduly affect neighbouring property.  I therefore voted to approve this application. The application was approved.

For application 13/00860/F at 181 College Road, a sunlight study was brought to committee which further indicated the impact of this property’s proposed rear extension on neighbouring properties.  The study indicated that during winter months the extension would block light, particularly during the morning, to the ground floor flat of the neighbouring property.  I suggested that there are alternative configurations that could have been considered by the architect to prevent the blocking of this light, such as by lowering the eaves of the extension and having the internal rooms extend into the roof space of a pitched roof. I therefore voted against the approval of this application. The application was approved.

I voted for enforcement action to be taken against 6 Nelson Street for unauthorised change of use. The evidence presented, as well as communication from residents in my ward, indicated to me beyond a doubt that this property had undergone an unauthorised change of use from shop to hot food takeaway.

I voted for enforcement action against 33 Grosvenor Road, which had replaced windows in a conservation area without obtaining planning permission, giving my reason that “there is little point in having conservation areas if they do not protect the heritage of the area”.

Both enforcement actions were approved.


One Comment

  1. Alison
    Posted 26 July, 2013 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

    You made good points per your reasoning behind the votes. Keep up the good work, I hope you are enjoying the challenge!

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *