Agenda item

REFUSED

Demolition of existing garage and erection of three bedroomed detached dwelling.

The Planning Officer confirmed to Members that this was a resubmission with a revised scheme of a previously refused development on the same site (23/01815/FULL1). The current scheme had altered the proposal for the site, with the alterations taking into account the reasons for the previous refusal (as detailed on page 28 of the Report). As such, the application was now recommended for approval.

An oral presentation in support of the application was then received from the Agent. Members heard that a similar application was refused in July 2023 but this was a different design. The new dwelling was to be relocated to increase the separation from the neighbouring property from 1m to 2.4m and with no loss of natural light.

The Agent stated that the Applicant had commissioned a review regarding access to the site and the proximity to the junction, refuge island and a telegraph pole with no issues raised. The Applicant would consider provision for water harvesting if required. It was felt that the Applicant had sought to answer the queries raised from the previous refusal and felt he had satisfied the concerns raised.

Ward Councillor and Committee Member, Councillor Mark Brock, then addressed the committee. Cllr Brock stated his belief that the previous refusal reasons for this application still remained. The one change from the previous application, moving away from the neighbouring property, does not satisfy the concerns raised. The plan was still seen as an over cramped development that would be out of character with the spatial layout of the area. The traffic island between the two driveways was also seen as dangerous. Members were recommended to refuse the application for the same reasons as before.

During discussions it was agreed by some Members that this application only included a minor change to the previous submission and the plot and layout were inconsistent with the spatial layout of the area.

Other Members expressed the view that they felt the property had now been moved a considerable and acceptable distance from the boundary, with the applicant having satisfied previous concerns. There had been no objections received from Highways Officers with no issues regarding proximity to the pedestrian refuge island and telegraph pole.

Members having considered the Report, objections and representations RESOLVED that the APPLICATION BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The proposed development would be a cramped overdevelopment with an unacceptable impact on the spatial character of the locality by reason of location, siting and close proximity to neighbouring buildings and property boundaries within the surrounding development pattern and spatial layout of the area which would have a serious and adverse effect on the visual amenity of the streetscene contrary to Policies 4, 8 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan and Policies D3 and H2 of the London Plan, and the NPPF (2023).

2. The proposed development by reason of its overbearing nature, siting and proximity to neighbouring buildings and property boundaries would have a serious and adverse effect on the residential amenity enjoyed by the occupants of neighbouring property, contrary to Policies 4, 8 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan and Policies D3, D6 and H2 of the London Plan, and the NPPF (2023).