Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

There were no apologies for absence.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 18 September 2019 be approved as a correct record.

None.

It was confirmed that all items were marked Part I and would be heard in public.

Section 73 application (Minor Material Amendment) to vary Condition 2 (approved plans) of planning ref: 73733/APP/2018/4009 for external alterations to the existing building, including the erection of dormers, balconies and associated alterations, namely to provide an internal corridor for access to each unit, and windows instead of doors fronting the street.

Recommendation: Approval

Section 73 application (Minor Material Amendment) to vary Condition 2 (approved plans) of planning reference: 73733/APP/2018/4009 for external alteration to the existing building, including the erection of dormers, balconies and associated alterations, namely to provide an internal corridor for access to each unit and windows instead of doors fronting the street.

Officers introduced the application and noted the addendum, which removed Condition 8.

Members noted that a written submission was made to the Committee by the lead petitioner, in objection to the application.

The Councillors were informed that the cars that are currently at the site would remain there if the application was approved, as there were spaces marked out for the unit.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and upon being put to a vote, approved with seven votes in favour of the recommendation and one abstention.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Two-storey rear extension, single-storey front extension, conversion of garage to habitable use to include alterations to front elevation, conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer, six rooflights and alterations to roof, including raising of ridge height.

Recommendation: Approval

Two-storey rear extension, single-storey front extension, conversion of garage to habitable use to include alterations to front elevation, conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer, six rooflights and alterations to roof, including raising of ridge height.

Officers introduced the application and noted that, responding to comments submitted by the Gatehill Residents’ Association, the impact of the 45 degree line of sight would not prevent the neighbouring property at 65 Elgood Avenue from receiving adequate day and sunlight.

A petitioner spoke in objection to the application on behalf of the Gatehill Residents’ Association, and noted that the application was made in an area of special local character and that there were no comments in the report from the Council’s Conservation Officer. The Committee heard that the application included seven alterations to the dwelling, which together would transform the house and this would be contrary to policy. The petitioner noted that 95% of the width of the plot would be filled by the dwelling, and the proposed increase in plot size would create an overdominant dwelling. The Committee was informed that the stepped down pattern and roof height would lead to the dwelling to encroach on the neighbouring property at 65 Elgood Avenue, and 61 Elgood Avenue would be deprived of light in the living room. The petitioner concluded that while the cumulative effect of the alteration would change the appearance of the house, but the roof height change would affect the street scene and lead to the premises becoming overbearing on the street scene and encroaching on neighbouring properties.

The applicant addressed the Committee and stated that the additional living space was to provide for his extended family. Members heard that the applicant worked with the Planning Department and engaged with the Gateshill Residents’ Association to incorporate their ideas for the application where possible. The Committee heard that the street scene was very diverse, and the applicant wanted to adhere to policies, and based plans on similar changes to the street scene where a precedence had already been set. The applicant stated that the proposals were not detrimental ot the local amenity and harmonised with the street scene, as the dormer windows and hanging roof were not original to this property. Members heard that the application does not present the loss of any material amenity for neighbours, and the proposed hip to gable roof would help neighbouring properties receive sunlight.

Ward Councillor for Northwood Hills, Councillor John Morgan, stated that the application was for a big increase with a 56% increase in roof height. The Committee heard that there would be overhanging to 65 Elgood Avenue, and the plot would be just one metre from the boundary wall. Councillor Morgan noted that the application was overdominant and overbearing and should be considered for refusal. Responding to questioning from the Committee, Councillor Morgan noted that the 56% increase in roof height was a figure quoted by the GRA.

Members stated concerns regarding the ridge height of the roof,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

Erection of two-storey building and a single-storey building, for use as a self-storage facility with associated parking.

Recommendation: Refusal

Erection of two-storey building and single-storey building for use as a self-storage facility with associated parking.

Officers introduced the application, and Members heard that there was a petition in objection to the application.

Councillor Jonathan Bianco, Ward Councillor for Northwood Hills, addressed the Committee and noted that the proposal would be detrimental to the area, as it would affect the service road for local shops. Members heard that retail activity needed to be protected in the area, and residents would not want trucks servicing the shops to be moved to Joel Street. Furthermore, this would lead to noise concerns for local residents, and as such, Councillor Bianco urged the Committee to reject the proposal.

The Committee also noted that there was a sheltered housing development for old people nearby, and moved the officer’s recommendation.

The recommendation was seconded, and unanimously agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Two-storey building with habitable roof space to provide four two-bed and two three-bed self-contained flats with associated parking and amenity space, involving demolition of existing chalet bungalow.

Recommendation: Approval

Two-storey building with habitable roof space to provide four two-bed and two three-bed self-contained flats with associated parking and amenity space, involving the demolition of the existing chalet bungalow.

Officers introduced the application and noted the addendum, which included additional conditions.

Members were informed that officers had worked hard to get the application to this level, and the Committee agreed that it was a shame to lose the bungalow but there were no reasons for refusal, despite having concerns about the application.

Councillors noted that they were pleased to see three-bed flats included in the proposal, and moved, seconded and unanimously agree the officer’s recommendation.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.