The Committee considered an application for
the conversion of an existing outbuilding at 24 Sebright Avenue to 1 no. two bed dwelling.
Reason Why Being
Considered by Planning Committee
The application has been referred to the
Committee at the request of Councillor Griffiths on the grounds of
traffic generation/parking and potential adverse effect on
The report set out the comments of the Deputy
Director – Economic Development and Planning including the
site and surrounding area, the proposals, relevant planning
policies, planning history and consultations and representations.
The late papers included a statement in support from the agent for
The information in the report was presented by
the Development Management Services Team Leader in conjunction with
a powerpoint presentation for the
The following people had registered to speak
on the application:
(Local resident); Councillors Griffiths and Stephen (Ward
Key Points of
Mr Yaqub spoke in objection to the
application as a local resident and on behalf of other residents.
The main issues were insufficient car parking on the site,
difficulties with access/egress, the congested nature of
Sebright Avenue and the impact on
highway and pedestrian safety. Mr Yaqub
answered questions from Committee Members.
Councillors Griffiths and Stephen raised a number of issues that
had been raised by local residents. These related to creating
additional congestion on an already busy residential street,
pavement parking, the lack of space on the driveway of the
property, wheelchair and cycle access due to the narrowness of the
side passageway, privacy of neighbours at the rear of the property,
highway safety and the Highway Authority’s parking
The outbuildings have been vacant for many years and have therefore
not impacted on highway and residential amenity for a considerable
The Highway Authority had objected to the application and their
comments should be give significant weight, as they had highlighted
concerns about highway safety and hazards to pedestrians. The
majority of Committee Members did not consider that the conversion
to residential outweighed these concerns.
The fall-back position is unlikely to happen due to the constraints
of the site.
Access to the outbuilding by foot or cycle will be very difficult
if vehicles for the new dwelling are parked on site.
Some Committee Members expressed the view that, on balance, the
provision of new residential accommodation to a reasonable standard
and the renovation of the existing outbuildings represented a
betterment of the existing site.
A proposal to refuse the application was made
and this was seconded. The Legal Team Manager advised that, in a
case where the Committee were minded to take a decision which was
contrary to the Officers’ recommendation, the vote should be
‘minded to refuse’ and not refusal in accordance with
the Council’s Constitution.
The Development Management Services Team
Leader summarised his understanding of the proposed reasons for
refusal, based on the points raised in the discussion, as
The application will be contrary to Development Plan Policies SWDP
view the full minutes text for item 22.