Agenda item

Planning Application Documents

The Planning Officer presented the report relating to a first floor side extension over an existing garage to a detached property in the residential area on The Lanes.  This was a revised scheme to an application previously refused and was before Committee at the request of the ward councillor due to its impact on neighbouring amenity. The original application was for an extension to be built over both garages however the revised scheme was now reduced allowing 12m to the neighbour’s rear elevation and Officers were now happy there was no overbearing impact.  There was a condition on the restriction of new openings on the proposed extension.

The Chair invited Mrs Toni Wadley to speak in favour of the application.  Mrs Wadley apologised for the absence of her husband and explained her recent major operation to remove a brain tumour.  She stated that she was at high risk of needing a wheelchair if she required further surgery.   They had lived in The Lanes for 14 years and had a young family and they were all involved with the local community which they loved.  They wished to extend their space as their family grew and also to accommodate Mrs Wadley’s aftercare.  They had taken on board the feedback from the Planning Officers and amended their plans accordingly.  They wished to increase the size of the smallest bedroom and to create a larger bedroom with an en-suite. They were keen to keep to the design of the existing house and blend in roof lines and building materials, with the idea to extend the house, not build an extension as such.

In response to members’ questions, the Officer was requested to share his screen again to show the block plan and proposed elevations.  He explained that the measurement of 12m was taken from the rear wall elevation of the neighbouring property and not from the protruding conservatory which was not generally taken into account. 

With regard to the question that an extension should be subservient to the main building, the Officer replied that the supplementary planning document mentioned subservience with particular reference to semi-detached properties and this was not always applicable to detached properties.   The Officer felt the width of this extension over just one garage meant some level of subservience was still achieved. 

Finally the Officer clarified that his report focused mainly on the impact on 23 The Lanes as that was the reason for the refusal.  The impact on 3 The Spindles had not caused any concern for Officers previously as the distance was what was expected with that neighbour, there was only one skylight on the rear elevation of the extension and there would be control on any future windows to maintain privacy.

There being no further questions the Chair moved to debate and the following comments were made by members:

·         Following the Parish Council report on this, a member visited the site, and felt there was an impact on the neighbour’s house but acknowledged that outlook and a view was not necessarily a planning issue.   He felt that as the local councillor he felt the only way for fairness on this for both parties was to have an open and transparent debate.  He could see both sides of the argument and as the local councillor would abstain from the vote.

·         Despite earlier comments on subservience, this extension benefited from a shared roof height and that in time it would not be possible to distinguish between the new and old.  Planned extension was sound and made good use of space.  Understood concerns of no.23 but now it had been modified the impact was less and they would not suffer any loss of light.  No. 3 The Spindles was far enough away and felt this was a practical solution for the residents.

·         Not a fan of the ruling of subservience and in this case think it would look out of place.  A good compromise and solution, gave applicant what they wanted and impact on neighbours minimal.

There being no further comments the Chair moved to vote to permit as per the Officer’s recommendation.

For : 9

Against : 0

Abstain : 1

PERMITTED