Homeowner in Caldecote told by planners to tear down triple garage complete with playroom, gym and snug

He tried to get retrospective planning permission - but this was refused by councillors
A triple garage in Caldecote complete with playroom, gym and snug will need to be pulled down after retrospective planning permission was refused.A triple garage in Caldecote complete with playroom, gym and snug will need to be pulled down after retrospective planning permission was refused.
A triple garage in Caldecote complete with playroom, gym and snug will need to be pulled down after retrospective planning permission was refused.

A triple garage in Caldecote complete with playroom, gym and snug will need to be pulled down after retrospective planning permission was refused.

A town planner speaking on behalf of the applicant urged members of North Warwickshire Borough Council’s planning board to approve the Weddington Lane structure. But after making two separate visits to the site on the A444 close to where it joins the A5, they voted to reject the plans when they met on Monday.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Tamsin Cottle explained that her client, Mark Spencer, had been ill-advised but argued that there were no grounds for refusing permission.

She said: “Due to advice from other professionals, Mr Spencer did start work without consent but during the application he has complied with all requests from the council and he has stopped work on the garage until this matter is resolved.

“The [officer’s] report concludes that the proposed development sufficiently safeguards the daylight and sunlight amenity of the neighbouring property. No evidence had been submitted to contradict this.”

But councillors also heard from neighbour Christopher Welford.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He told the meeting: “We were advised by the applicant when he commenced building that he was only looking to replace his existing garages with a triple garage; that is the reason why we allowed him to place scaffolding on our property.

“We consider that our view of the development is consistent with looking at an industrial building - it is obtrusive, overbearing and evasive. It is not sympathetic to the local area and our home as it is so large and disproportionate in its scale.”

Board members agreed with Mr Welford and were unanimous in refusing planning permission.

Cllr Dan Hancocks (Con, Polesworth East) said: “This is a high building and from those windows you can actually see everything that goes on in the neighbouring garden.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Cllr Margaret Bell (Con, Hartshill) said the new garage block was ‘intimidating’ and out of keeping with the house next door, while Cllr Neil Dirveiks (Lab, Atherstone Central) was concerned about the health of an oak tree close to the building.

He added: “As soon as you walk on to the site and towards Timberlea you are aware of this big mass. We have been told that no permanent damage has been done to the oak tree - but it is only luck.

“We do seem to get a lot of applications where people think they can just build something and get away with it because it is just up there. I just think this is totally inappropriate. It is too close to the border and it is too big and has too big an effect on the neighbouring property.”

Related topics: