PROPOSAL: Erection of dwelling and new access drive.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION: Permit.

7.44          This application was for erection of a dwelling and new access drive.

7.45          The Development Management Team Manager (East) advised that the application sought full planning permission for the erection of a detached two storey, four bedroom dwelling on the corner of Moorfield Road and Ermin Street.  The site currently formed part of the residential curtilage of No. 2 Moorfield Road, a detached property on a corner plot in a built-up residential area of Brockworth.  The site was within the designated development boundary of Brockworth, as defined within the Tewkesbury Borough Plan, and the principle of developing the plot was deemed acceptable on that basis, subject to the application of all other relevant policies within the plan.  The proposed new dwelling was designed with a hipped roof comprising grey roof tiles, the walls would be faced with render on a brick plinth to match the immediate area.  Concerns had initially been raised by the Parish Council and Officers as to the scale of the building within the sub-divided plot resulting in the applicants revising the proposal to reduce the scale and massing.  The building was now considered to be appropriately sized in relation to the plot and the surrounding dwellings in the area.  Concerns had been raised by the Parish Council with regard to the access into the site which would be via an existing access for No. 2 Moorfield Road which would be widened to accommodate both dwellings.  Additional information had been provided by the applicant to demonstrate that cars could safely manoeuvre within both sites and exit the site in a forward gear.  The County Highways Officer had assessed the details and advised that the access was acceptable and safe, subject to planning conditions.  The Committee report set out the material planning considerations which had been assessed in accordance with policies in the development plan and it was considered the proposal would not result in any undue harm, therefore, the application was recommended for permission, subject to conditions.  The Development Management Team Manager (East) advised that condition 6 required the provision of sheltered, secure and accessible bicycle storage and the applicant had provided those details as part of the application.  This condition could be removed or amended depending on Members’ views, should they be minded to look favourably on the application.   It was noted that a late request had been made for a Planning Committee Site Visit which was after the deadline and, as it had not been possible to visit the site, multiple photographs of the access had been taken to assist Members in their determination of the application.

7.46          The Chair indicated that there were no public speakers for this item.  The Officer recommendation was to permit the application and he sought a motion from the floor.  A Member asked whether the access would be retained in perpetuity and confirmation was provided that County Highways had recommended a condition to ensure it was maintained.  Another Member raised concern about the distance of the access from Ermin Street and felt that the photographs did not show the usual situation with on-street parking on that road, which was a main thoroughfare from Brockworth to Shurdington Road and Stroud..  She had made the late request for the site visit and felt that it was necessary to defer the application to allow that to take place.  The representative from County Highways explained that the plans initially submitted with the application had caused concern as there was a requirement for the access to be a width of 20 metres from the junction – the plans submitted showed this was 10 metres.  The applicant had subsequently submitted revised plans to accord with the requirement and the access had been increased to 10 metres in width.  County Highways was satisfied that, at the point of access, there was sufficient visibility to the junction and a distance in excess of 40 metres.  A condition would be included to ensure pedestrian visibility splays of 2 metres by 2 metres, measured back from the back of the footway, would be provided on both sides of the access.  As such, County Highways was satisfied the access could be used safely and that there was sufficient visibility.  A Member disputed the 40 metre distance and the representative from County Highways clarified that the distance to the junction itself was 20 metres and to the right of the access it was over 43 metre which met the requirements for a 30mph road.

7.47          It was proposed and seconded that the application be deferred for a Planning Committee Site Visit to assess the safety of the access.  The seconder of the motion indicated that he was reluctant to second a Planning Committee Site Visit when there was a process in place for making requests prior to the meeting; however, on this occasion he felt it was it was necessary for Members to see the access and the potential impact given that it was onto a major thoroughfare.  The Development Management Team Manager (East) clarified the location of the access and the distances to the junction and indicated that the visibility splay would be improved by the proposed access.

7.48          Upon being put to the vote, it was

RESOLVED           That the application be DEFERRED for a Planning Committee Site Visit to assess the safety of the access.