Loading
The decisions as the council's minutes record them. A plain-language summary follows once it has been written.
RESOLVED – That delegated authority be given to the Chief Officer Economy and Planning to GRANT planning permission, in accordance with the recommendation as set out in COEP/35/24 and subject to amended plans being submitted to reduce the height of the decking to 30cm above existing ground level.
Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors, Annette Davies, Dana Davies, Jon Jolley and Marc Jones
No declarations of interest made at this meeting
Decision as recorded
RESOLVED – That delegated authority be given to the Chief Officer Economy and Planning to GRANT planning permission, in accordance with the recommendation as set out in COEP/35/24 and subject to amended plans being submitted to reduce the height of the decking to 30cm above existing ground level.
The Head of Development Management introduced the report which was for the demolition of existing garage and existing rear extension and erection of single storey rear extension to create annexe accommodation. The floor plan of the extension would be 'L' shaped, projecting just over 4m from the rear elevation of the existing dwelling adjacent to the boundary with No. 59 Borras Road and, including the projecting overhang of the roof, 11m from the rear elevation of the existing dwelling adjacent to the boundaries with Nos.1 and 2 Ffordd Dyfed. The submitted plans also showed the provision of a decked area to the side (south-west) and rear (north-west) of the extension. Members had previously voted for a site visit to assess the relationship between the extension at no 61 Borras Road and the dwelling at No 3 Ffordd Dyfed. The Head of Development Management made the following points: · The nearest part of the extension would be 0.6 of a metre in from the boundary of No 3 Ffordd Dyfed · The fence was 1.5 metres in height from the neighbour’s side and there was also a second fence at 2.0 metres height. The fence was approximately 30 centimetres in from the boundary · The proposed extension would be a metre higher than the neighbours outbuilding at 2.5 metres height · The proposed extension would not be overbearing or give significant loss of light to the neighbours habitable rooms. · The decking proposed was 40 centimetres higher than ground level, it would be 1 metre in from the boundary fence on the applicants side · The impact of the decking would not be materially different to one erected under permitted development rights · Design wise the proposals would not have a significant impact on the street scene · No highway safety concerns The Chair acknowledged that the site visit had been beneficial and thanked both the applicant and the neighbour for permitting the visit. A discussion ensued and the following points were raised: · Clarification was sought that the height of the decking was permissible in relation to the regulations, particularly in relation to potential overlooking · Confirmation given that decking up to the height of 30 centimetres was permitted, anything higher required planning permission · Clarification was sought on the proposed height of the flat roof of the extension · Confirmation was given that the height of the extension to the top of the roof would be 3.5 metres from ground level · Members were reminded that they were dealing with the details of the application that had been submitted An amendment was suggested that the decision be delegated to officers subject to an amended plan being submitted indicating the revised height to the decking. The amendment was put to the vote and carried. Members were minded to grant the application subject to amended plans being submitted to reduce the height of the decking to 30cm above existing ground level. RESOLVED – That delegated authority be given to the Chief Officer Economy and Planning to GRANT planning permission, in accordance with the recommendation as set out in COEP/35/24 and subject to amended plans being submitted to reduce the height of the decking to 30cm above existing ground level.
Councillors must say when they have a personal link to something being discussed, such as a job, a property or a family member. A prejudicial interest is one strong enough that the councillor usually leaves the room and takes no part.
Declarations are read from the minutes once they are published.
The council hasn't recorded attendance for this meeting.
Lists the council's current councillors only. Co-opted members, officers and former councillors aren't shown.