Agenda item

Raising of roof to allow for conversion of bungalow to two storey dwelling to include completion of single storey rear extension with alterations to side elevation and raising of rear patio (Part-retrospective)

Recommendation: Approval

Raising of roof to allow for conversion of bungalow to two storey dwelling to include completion of single storey rear extension with alterations to side elevation and raising of rear patio (Part-retrospective)

Officers introduced the report and referred to the changes as set out in the Addendum.

In accordance with the Council’s constitution, a representative of the petition received in objection to the application was invited to address the meeting.

The petitioner made the following points:

• The proposed development  would not harmonise with the existing street scene
• The proposed  development would entail alterations and extensions to existing buildings
• The proposed development would not improve or complement the character of the area
• The proposed development would be an over development of the site, in terms of bulk, height, position and over dominance
• The close proximity of the proposal to neighbouring properties would lead to a cramped development and would lead to a closing of the visual gap
• The proposed development would incorporate a new roof height which would be higher than surrounding properties
• The proposed development would lead to a loss of sun light and day light to surrounding properties
• The applicant had started the proposed extension under permitted development rights which did not apply in this case.
• The removal of a bungalow would set an unwelcome precedent and remove housing stock best suited to pensioners and the less able bodied.

The applicant spoke and raised the following points:

• The proposed development would not be detrimental to the area
• The property was in a state of disrepair and was an eye sore. Extensive works would bring an improvement to the area.
• Prior to purchasing the property, the applicant had worked with the Planning Department to ensure that an acceptable scheme was devised
• An overshadowing diagram had been produced at appreciable cost to the applicant to ensure the scheme met current guidelines and requirements

A ward councillor spoke in support of the petitioners in objection to the proposal and the following points were raised:

• The proposed development would not harmonise with the with the area
• The proposed development would be an overdevelopment and over dominant

Officers confirmed that the overshadowing diagram displayed in the officer presentation was based on the current planning proposal. Officers explained that in their view, if the application went to appeal there were insufficient grounds in relation to overshadowing to defend this on appeal. In relation to the roof line, Officers explained that there would be sufficient habitable roof space, if the roof were raised, but that if this was the case then a further planning application would be required.

In relation to the car parking provision highlighted in the report, the Highways officer confirmed that cars would be unable to park as shown in the diagrams and one of the vehicles would need to be parked at a diagonal. Upon reflection, the Committee agreed that the only planning grounds which could be used to refuse the application related to overshadowing.

The recommendation for approval was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed with four votes in favour, one vote against and one abstention.

Resolved –

That the application be Approved as per agenda and an additional condition be added regarding removing Permitted Development Rights