Telford homeowner takes new home plan to appeal accusing council of ‘nonsense’
A Telford homeowner has accused planners of ‘nonsense’ after they rejected proposals for a new dwelling on land at the end of a private drive.
Now applicant Jake Woodhall has appealed to an inspector who is set to decide the fate of the proposal which had already been thrown out once before by Telford & Wrekin Council.
“Officers consider that the proposal would result in an uncharacteristic addition which is contrived in nature,” planners wrote of the site in Broom Drive, Overdale.
“Furthermore, given the relationship between the proposed dwelling and the nearby highway and the overall site layout proposed, officers consider the scheme would fail to be in keeping with the prevailing character and appearance of the surrounding area, resulting in an extrinsic element within the surrounding streetscene, which fails to preserve or reinforce historic street patterns and layouts.”
But planning agent Andrew John Williams, of Advance Land & Planning, hit back in submissions to the Planning Inspectorate.
“The claim that the development would harm the ‘street scene’ is a nonsense, said the agent.
“The proposal will create a positive and attract terminal vista. Furthermore, the development will not be of a scale and appearance that is any way harmful to the character of the area.”
The agent and appellant also hit out over the council claiming that it had acted “positively and proactively” by “identifying matters of concern with the proposal and raising those with the applicant/agent.
“However, in this case it has not been possible to arrive at a satisfactory resolution.”
The planning agent said: “The appellant strongly disputes this statement. During the statutory eight week period, the application was allocated to no less than three case officers, with the last one only picking it up for consideration in the final week.
“During the process, the agent (Foster Architecture) made several attempts to ascertain progress of the application and more importantly, whether there were any issues that needed to be addressed.
“He was only advised of reasons by the third case officer, at the ‘eleventh hour’ and then because of time constraints associated with the statutory period for determination, he was denied the opportunity to address these two concerns, before the decision notice was hastily issued.”
The appellant has submitted revised drawings to the Inspector which he requests that the Planning Inspectorate will accept because they are ‘beneficial’ to third parties.
“The appellant’s agent was not given a fair opportunity to address two of the three reasons for refusal,” the agent claims.
“Hence why slightly modified proposals are now submitted for consideration as part of this appeal.
“It is maintained that the original scheme is perfectly acceptable, but that the proposed revised scheme, which specifically addresses refusal reasons is even more acceptable.“
The planning team at the council has until September 17 to submit an appeal statement.
A council spokesperson said it “not appropriate” for the authority as a whole to make comment ahead of the appeal decision.
