To report any issues with the information below please email executivecycle@westberks.gov.uk.

Agenda item

25/00233/HOUSE - Trapps Hill Cottage, Trapps Hill, Inkpen, Hungerford

Proposal:

Demolition of existing rear extensions, garage and home office. New two storey rear extension and single storey side extension with new open porch. New garage with store over. New landscaping work.

Location:

Trapps Hill Cottage, Trapps Hill, Inkpen, Hungerford

Applicant:

Mr and Mrs Davies

Recommendation:

To delegate to the Development Manager to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the conditions listed in the report.

 

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 25/00233/HOUSE Inkpen in respect of demolition of existing rear extensions, garage and home office. New two storey rear extension and single storey side extension with new open porch. New garage with store over. New landscaping work. Trapps Hill Cottage, Trapps Hill, Inkpen, Hungerford

 

1.      Ms Isabel Oettinger introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

2.      In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Ms Sian Griffiths, agent, and Mr Tony Vickers, Ward Member addressed the Committee on this application.

Agent Representation

3.      Ms Griffiths addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Western Area Planning Committee - Recording

Member Questions to the Applicant/Agent

4.      Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       The applicant wished to retain the character of the cottage, which would be lost if it was demolished.

·       The applicant had agreed to a planning condition, which required an ongoing recording program for approval by Officers.

Ward Member Representation

5.      Councillor Vickers addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here:

Western Area Planning Committee - Recording

Member Questions to the Ward Member

6.      Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Member Questions to Officers

7.      Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Officers were satisfied with the application and the heritage statement and noted that the applicant would retain as much as possible of the original frontage.

·       Officers stated that no objections were received.

·       Officers indicated that the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Team would verify if the development would result in a net increase of more than 100 square metres in floor space. A CIL charge would be levied if the floor space increase more than 100 square metres. Any exemption would be dealt with after the Committee decision had been issued.

·       Officers would investigate the CIL statement, and would clarify that in future reports, as other exemptions could apply.

Debate

8.      Councillor Paul Dick opened the debate by stating that he was content with the recommendation of Officers and was in favour of it, and he praised the quality of the report.

9.      Councill Denise Gaines noted that the frontage of the development would not be changed and was disappointed that the catslide roof would be removed but indicated that it was not part of the original design. She was in favour of Officer recommendations.

10.   Councillor Tony Vickers considered that the current cottage was not suitable for modern habitation, and an extension would enable it to be habitable. He noted the balanced nature of the application but was supportive of the application.

11.   Councillor Anthony Amirtharaj agreed with the statements made by Councillor Dick and Councillor Vickers and supported the application.

12.   Councillor Dennis Benneyworth considered that villages needed to improve over time and felt that the development was planned sympathetically and would keep a notable amount of the original design and was in favour of the application.

13.   Councillor Vickers proposed to accept Officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report. This was seconded by Councillor Dick.

14.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Vickers, seconded by Councillor Dick to grant planning permission. At the vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and update report.

 

 

 

Supporting documents: