Objectors told house saga ‘might not stop’
Residents of a Perth street are said to be at their wits’ end having to raise repeated objections to a man’s plan to add another home to their street.
One man, unhappy he has now been asked to comment on Gary Coull’s plans to build a new two storey property on Struan Street a third time, has filed a formal complaint with the council about the matter.
Mr Coull’s first application to build a property between 18 and 20 Struan Street, which drew 11 objections from residents, was refused by a planning officer last year under delegated powers after they agreed the new house would be “very much at odds” with the rest of the street.
The officer’s report of handling said: “As noted in a number of representations, the proposed house is very much at odds with both the design of existing terraced row and the original architectural intent.
“The two existing properties at both 18 and 20 Struan Road form quite a distinctive ‘bookend’, framing the space between the two terraced rows and creating an identifiable architectural feature.
“Whilst the proposed new house is effectively attempting to continue the existing terrace row, mimicking the design and scale of the main terraced properties, it completely detracts from the main qualities noted above.”
Mr Coull applied a second time to add a similar sized property to the street earlier this year after tweaking the design but this drew a further eight objections from locals and was also refused by an officer who again raised concerns the house would be “at odds” with neighbours’ houses.
Their report of handling said: “Despite the amendments to the design of the house, I remain of the view that the proposals are at odds with both the design of [the] existing terraced row and the original architectural intent.
“The revised design is a slight improvement, but it will still upset the symmetry of the two existing properties at 18 and 20 Struan Road and remove the sense of open space which was previously highlighted as being important to the character of the area.”
However, an agent acting for Mr Coull has since angered locals who thought he would accept the latest decision by asking the council’s local review body to reconsider his second application.
Appeal documents sent to PKC by the agent and seen by the PA say: “My client understands [the] points [the] planning officer has made in his report. However he is aware that innumerable non-harmonious developments have been previously approved in [the] PKC area.
“Indeed, developments have been refused because the proposed design mimics existing architecture too closely.”
One resident who shared the formal complaint that has been made about Mr Coull’s applications told the PA they felt it was unfair his applications were getting so much consideration when other residents had been denied permission to build relatively modest extensions.
The resident, who did not wish to be named, added: “The planning officer stated yesterday that applications for this proposed dwelling can keep rolling on and on and it might never stop.
“We as residents are sick with stress objecting to this proposed application.”
A PKC spokesperson responded: “PKC operates an open and transparent planning process.
“This planning application was refused in August and the applicant has asked for this decision to be considered by the local review body, as is their statutory right.
“The complainant’s comments have been responded to directly, but also passed to the local review body as background material for its consideration.
“Planning authorities can only refuse to consider repeated applications for the same site if there is no change to the proposal or circumstances.
“However, this would be an extremely rare occurrence and planning officers will consider every application on its own merits.”