Agenda item

Demolition of existing dwelling and rear outbuildings, replacement by a detached dwelling and detached double garage (amended application following withdrawal of application P22/S3901/FUL and as amplified by additional information received 31 July 2023).

The committee considered planning application P23/S1070/FUL for the demolition of existing dwelling and rear outbuildings, replacement by a detached dwelling and detached double garage (Amended application following withdrawal of application P22/S3901/FUL and as amplified by additional information received 31 July 2023), on land at The Walled Garden House, High Street, Whitchurch-on-Thames.  

Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history were detailed in the officer’s report, which formed part of the agenda pack for the meeting. 

The planning officer introduced the report and highlighted that the application was brought to the committee due to the objection of Whitchurch-on-Thames Parish Council.

The planning officer informed the committee that permission was sought to demolish the existing dwelling on the site and erect a new replacement dwelling. The parish council objection was based on the scale, bulk, and massing of the new dwelling being harmful and adversely impact the townscape, harming the nearby listed buildings, and increase flood risk. He also informed members that since the publication of the agenda, an additional neighbour response was received which commented on the loss of privacy to neighbours.

The planning officer did not believe that the proposed dwelling would adversely impact neighbours, although he confirmed that it would command strong visual presence on the Highstreet. However, he highlighted to the committee that the proposed dwelling would better correspond to the conservation area than the existing building, be better in-keeping with its surroundings due to its design and use of materials, and not be substantially taller than buildings on the other side of the Highstreet.

As there were no objections from technical consultees, the drainage engineer did not believe it would result in any increase flood risk, and the conservation officer believed that the proposal would not adversely impact surrounding listed buildings, the planning officer recommended that the application be approved.

Councillor Jim Donahue spoke on behalf of Whitchurch-on-Thames Parish Council, objecting to the application. 

Mr Armstrong spoke objecting to the application. 

Tony Thorpe, the agent representing the applicant, spoke in support of the application. 

Councillor Peter Dragonetti, a local ward councillor, spoke objecting to the application. 

The committee asked about the size of the property on its plot and if it the plot was sufficiently large to hold the property and the planning officer confirmed that he did not believe it to be overdevelopment for the plot size. He also noted that the dwelling was proposed to be moved south which would give more space to the north and so preserve the spacious nature of the plot.

On the neighbouring property and if the property overlooked the neighbours, the planning officer confirmed that there was a condition for obscure glazing to be installed on the first-floor windows on the site facing the immediate neighbours to prevent overlooking.

Members asked about the current ‘neutral impact’ the dwelling had on the conservation area described in the report and if the increased size of the property meant that there would be a more than neutral impact. However, the planning officer highlighted to the committee that both the size and quality of the dwelling were factors in that calculation, so although the size increased the historical qualities and architecture would be more positive. Overall, this satisfied members as they agreed that the building would be more sympathetic to the conservation area than the present building. 

Although some member noted the size of the dwelling that would be visible above the wall and the impact this would have when viewed from the Highstreet, they agreed that there were a number of large dwellings along the road and that the wall would shield most of the views of the dwelling, although it was higher than the existing dwelling. Therefore, the committee were satisfied that the application was proportionate and appropriate for the plot and in keeping with the surrounding character of the area.

Some members commented on the sue of the site, and how it was preferable to have one large property over many smaller properties, although they agreed that it was not the committees place to speculate on the use of the site.

Although some members had concerns about the potential for flooding, the committee were satisfied that the proposed conditions would mitigate any potential flood risk and could not see it as a reason to refuse the application.

Overall, as the committee were satisfied with the officers’ responses to their questions, and that the proposed application would be sympathetic to the surrounding area and the conservation area, that it would preserve neighbouring amenity, and would not cause increased flood risk, they agreed that the application should be approved subject to conditions.

A motion, moved and seconded, to approve the application was carried on being put to the vote. 

RESOLVED: to approve planning application P23/S1070/FUL, subject to the following conditions:

1. Commencement of development within 3 years of date of permission

2. Implement development in accordance with plans

3. Photographic schedule of all external materials to be agreed prior to development

4. Surface water drainage scheme to be submitted and agreed in writing

5. Flood/Drainage measures to be implemented in accordance with details submitted and agreed

6. Foul drainage scheme to be submitted and agreed in writing

7. Flooding compensation compliance report to be submitted and agreed in writing

8. Obscure glazing to first floor side facing windows

9. Electric Vehicle Charging Points to be provided on site

10. Protected species mitigation measures to be implemented as agreed

11. Ecological mitigation measures to be submitted for approval

12. Verification report to be submitted demonstrating compliance with Energy Statement measures

13. Landscaping to be provided in accordance with landscaping plan

14. Tree Protection measures to protect existing trees on site, to be submitted and agreed in writing