Minutes:
The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report together with background information in respect of the site.
The Committee was advised that since the publication of the agenda two additional
representations had been received via a Ward Councillor which raised the
following issues: scale, look of the building and the level of intrusion; not
meeting guildelines with regards to privacy; the
application of the 25° rule;
and why the 45° rule was not applied as the proposed extension appeared
contrary to it.
It was reported that in respect of scale, Victoria House was a large
building which was three storeys in height and the proposed extension whilst
being large, would respect the scale of the existing building and form an
acceptable relationship with surrounding buildings.
It was noted that the update list was published prior to the meeting and
contained further information relating to the elevations of the building;
privacy aspects and the relationship of the development with its nearest
neighbours. It further discussed the 45° rule and its uses.
Officers also advised the Committee that an additional condition was
recommended for the submission of a scheme for the provision of future charging
points of ultra-low emission vehicles, which the applicant had agreed to
accept.
The Committee was addressed by Victoria Jones, a local resident who
objected to the proposal. She spoke
regarding the distances between the development and the surrounding houses
being insufficient and not complying with minimum standards: she argued that
the apartments were too close to neighbours; not enough space had been left
between habitable windows; and that the measurements and angles presented in
the plan/report were not accurate. She
suggested that the proposal was out of character with the area and that the
third storey on the flats was domineering and not to scale with the surrounding
area.
The Committee was then addressed by James Nicholls, from Halton Housing
Trust. He stated that they were a
reputable not for profit company who would develop high quality homes on a site
that had remained vacant for the past 3 years.
He advised Members that they had carried out a consultation process with
residents to discuss their concerns over highway safety and future tenant
selection. He further stated that they
planned to restore the original features of the property and that as the
extension was set back, residents views would not be
affected. He stated that the flats did
not directly face the neighbours; the development would retain the character of
the area; and would provide economic benefit as well as additional housing for
Halton.
Local Ward Councillor Sinnott then addressed Members referring them to
paragraph 5.2 of the report where it stated that 75 representations had been
received in relation to the application, objecting to the proposal. She reiterated the main objections: that the
building was an undesignated heritage asset and this would be lost; shrubs
would disappear; there would be an impact on neighbours from being overlooked;
the extensions would affect the look of the site; and there was a lack of
amenities such as schools, open spaces and parking for the new residents. She also raised concerns over traffic access
and parking during construction and the nature of the vehicles accessing the
site. She requested that the views of
the local people are heard.
After hearing the updates and representations Members discussed the matters raised by the speakers in particular the lack of amenities for residents and the distances between the properties not complying with those recommended.
Councillor John Stockton moved to defer the application until such time as further consultation can be carried out with residents and to address the issues raised above.
Councillor Thompson seconded the motion and the Committee voted to agree to defer the application for the reasons stated above.
RESOLVED: That the application be deferred so clarity can be sought regarding the points raised by residents with regards to proximity between properties and to address the provision of amenities for local residents.