Motion status:Agreed
Motion status:Rejected
A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:
Resolved: that planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00394, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out on the Planning Portal.
Resolved: that planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00586, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out on the planning portal.
Resolved: That planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00587, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out on the Planning Portal.
Councillor Shields motioned to refuse the application on the grounds that the proposal would cause material harm to area, by virtue of bulk design and massing, with a failure to preserve or enhance the unique architecture of the area.
The motion was seconded by Councillor Sadiq.
The Head of Planning advised that grounds for refusal may not have the best prospect of success at appeal, and members requested that he provide some guidance. The Head of Planning, based on the comments at debate, summarised the committee's views as causing material harm and overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a cramped development, leading to decreased amenity space with an adverse effect on the area.
Councillor Shields retracted his earlier motion and motioned on the above comments made by The Head of Planning for the grounds for refusal.
A poll vote to refuse planning permission was taken on the grounds that the proposal would cause material harm and an overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a cramped development, reducing the level of amenity space, leading to an adverse effect on the area. When there voted:
Resolved: that planning permission be refused for application DM2018/00250 on the grounds that the proposal would cause material harm and an overdevelopment of the site, resulting in a cramped development, reducing the level of amenity space, leading to an adverse effect on the area.
A poll vote on the officers’ recommendation to grant permission subject to a condition to glaze the bathroom and hallway windows, was held in accordance with Standing Order 31.4, when there voted:
Resolved: that planning permission be granted for application No. DM2018/00274, subject to the conditions, reasons and informatives set out on the planning portal and the additional condition requested.
Councillor Shield’s motioned planning permission be refused on the grounds that the proposal would constitute an overly dominant form and be detrimental to the streetscene, as viewed from Cumner and Eaton Road.
A poll vote to refuse planning permission was taken on the grounds that the proposal would constitute an overly dominant form and be detrimental to the streetscene, as viewed from Cumner and Eaton Road. When there voted:
Resolved: that planning permission be refused on the grounds that the proposal would constitute an overly dominant form of development and would be detrimental to the streetscene, as viewed from Cumner and Eaton Road, for application No. DM2018/00090.