Home plan rejected over fears it would create a 'cramped appearance'

The two-storey home was proposed for a site on Woodhouse Crescent in Trench.

To make way for the home an existing garage was proposed to be demolished – with the home planned to have two parking spaces.

Submitted plans for the property showed a kitchen, shower and living/dining area on the ground floor. The first would have had three bedrooms and a bathroom.

A Telford & Wrekin Council planning officer assessed the application and said that the garden land once belonged to the property adjacent – 4 Woodhouse Crescent.

“Whilst it is appreciated that the site has been vacant for some time and hasn’t always been maintained, this is not a reason to allow an inappropriate form of development,” said the planning officer.

Councillor John Thompson, ward member for Wrockwardine Wood & Trench, objected to the application fearing that the plan would result in the area being ‘over developed’.

He said: “It (the land) has been kept untidy for years but an extra house would be too much in this area also this may cause other developments in the street removing garage or gardens.

“There are also concerns of parking on the bend of the road near the local school.”

Wrockwardine Wood & Trench Parish Council also objected to the home and raised fears about parking problems near the application site.

They said: “The site is on a very busy stretch of road which is often blocked by parents cars at school start and finish times and access and egress to the plot would be difficult.

“Councillors commented that this would be an over development of the site and the proposed plan is not in keeping with surrounding houses.”

The council planning officer refused the plans after raising concerns over its appearance and impact on adjacent properties.

They said that the site was not suitable to accommodate the proposed home, even if plans were amended.

They concluded: “By reason of its design, scale and position of the proposed development, the works would fail to respect or enhance the appearance of the host dwelling and would create a cramped appearance with the street scene, creating an incongruous feature.

“The proposal would have a significant detrimental impact upon the character of the area through subdivision of an existing plot and would be an unfavourable fragmentation of the curtilage of No.4 and would result in significant adverse impacts upon the residential amenity of neighbouring properties and that of the host property.”

“Due to the size of the application site, the proposed dwelling would be situated so that the whole of the property would be behind the rear elevation of No.4.

“Due to the short distances involved, this new dwelling would have a significant detrimental impact on the residential amenity of this property by way of overlooking, loss of light and by being overbearing.”

The planning refusal can be appealed by the applicant.