Issue - meetings

Erection of a part single storey, part two storey rear extension, a first floor side extension, and front porch following demolition of existing porch and conservatory. Conversion of roof space into habitable use to include a rear dormer, 1 rear facing roof light and 1 x front facing roof light. Removal of two existing chimneys. Conversion of garage to habitable use including amendments to fenestration.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer recommendation.

Erection of a part single storey, part two storey rear extension, a first floor side extension, and front porch following demolition of existing porch and conservatory. Conversion of roof space into habitable use to include a rear dormer, 1 rear facing roof light and 1 x front facing roof light. Removal of two existing chimneys. Conversion of garage to habitable use including amendments to fenestration.

Officers introduced the application, took Members through the plans and made a recommendation for approval.

A petitioner in objection of the application addressed the Committee, noting that the new buyers had introduced themselves and stated that the original proposal had been withdrawn. The petitioner raised objections against the volume and density of the new proposal, stating it did not fit with the environment. They opposed the two-storey rear extension, citing its impact on neighbouring properties, light and view. The petitioner also mentioned that the extension on the garage was not in keeping with the environment. Local Ward Councillors had been contacted and they had emphasised the importance of retaining the character of the area and preventing overdevelopment. It was submitted that these developments were spoiling the area, setting a future precedent and not in keeping with the local area.

In response to Member clarification questions, it was noted that the petitioner had not objected to any previous applications.

A representative of the application addressed the Committee, noting that the officers' report addressed many concerns raised in the petition. Denying the application would cause inconsistency, as other homes had undergone similar modifications. The home had been designed for a growing family and local amenities and schools made it appealing for family housing. The Committee was asked to support the application, emphasising its respectful enhancement of the existing home and its natural progression and enhancement of the neighbourhood.

Officers clarified several points raised in the petition and by the applicant. In terms of the light impact assessment, officers explained that the development cleared the 45° line from neighbouring windows, making it acceptable without needing further sun/day light assessments. It was also noted that planning permission had already been granted for the same development in 2021 and there had been no changes in planning policies or site circumstances since then.

Although Members empathised with the concerns raised by the petitioner, it was noted that this application had been approved previously and the Committee had limited options to refuse it.  The officers’ recommendation was therefore moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, was unanimously agreed. 

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer recommendation.