Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Chester, Jason Crooks, David Roach, Peter Stevens and Jim Thorndyke.

Any Member who is substituting for another Member should so indicate, together with the name of the relevant absent Member.

The following substitutions were declared:

Councillor Rachel Hood substituting for Councillor Mike Chester

Councillor Trevor Beckwith for Councillor Jason Crooks

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White for Councillor Peter Stevens

Councillor Terry Clements for Councillor Jim Thorndyke

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 5 June 2019 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 5 June 2019 were confirmed as a correct record, with 10 voting for the motion and 4 abstentions, and were signed by the Chair.

(Councillor Roger Dicker joined the meeting at 10.03am on conclusion of this item.)

Report No: DEV/WS/19/007

Householder Planning Application and Listed Building Consent - Insertion of two cat slide dormer windows within rear elevation

Householder Planning Application and Listed Building Consent - Insertion of two cat slide dormer windows within rear elevation

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel. 

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.

Hawstead Parish Council supported the application which was contrary to the Officer recommendation of refusal, for the reason set out in Paragraph 27 of Report No DEV/WS/19/007.

As part of his presentation the Planning Assistant highlighted the planning history of the site and outlined the Conservation Officer’s objection to the scheme.

Speaker:      Philip Baker (applicant) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Terry Clements spoke in his capacity as Ward Member for the application and highlighted the fact that the Parish Council had unanimously supported the application.

Councillor Clements went on to make specific reference to the rafters and the Officers’ concerns that the scheme could cause harm.  He also referred to a recent application granted by the Authority for the insertion of a dormer window in a thatched property.

In response to which, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) reminded the Committee that each application had to be considered on its own merits.

The Principal Conservation Officer was also invited to respond by the Chair and clarified that whilst the Heritage Statement did not refer to the age of the timbers Officers were, however, confident they were not modern and were likely to be 18^th Century.

Without evidence to the contrary, Officers were concerned that the proposed works could result in both physical harm to the fabric of the building and adverse harm to the historic character, by way of the proposed dormers being an overbearing addition.

Councillor Trevor Beckwith stated that, contrary to Officers, he considered that the scheme accorded with Policy DM15 of the Joint Development Management Plan and would not cause visual harm due to the dormers being located on the rear of the property and not visible from the street scene.

Councillor Clements proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the Officer recommendation of refusal, for this reason and this was duly seconded by Councillor Beckwith.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) drew attention to Paragraph 17 of the report and the duty of the decision maker to have special regard to the desirability of preserving or enhancing a listed building, or its setting, or any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possessed.

She also advised the Committee that if Members were minded to approve the application, contrary to the Officer recommendation, then the Decision Making Protocol would be invoked and Officers would undertake a Risk Assessment prior to a final decision being made on the application by the Committee.

Further debate then ensued with a number of Members suggesting that the application be deferred, in order to allow additional time in which for evidence to be provided to demonstrate that physical harm would not be caused to the fabric of the building by the insertion of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.