Issue - meetings

REFUSED

Description of application – Application submitted under S73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for the variation of Condition 3 to DC/16/00572/FULL6 granted for part one/two storey side/rear extensions with dormer windows, inset balcony, alterations to detached outbuilding to rear, additional vehicular access, elevational alterations and associated landscaping, to facilitate the addition of a basement, a chimney flue to the front elevation, 1 x rooflight to the side and internal alterations.

Oral representations in objection to and in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from visiting Ward Member Councillor Tony Owen were received at the meeting.

Further objections from the Petts Wood and District Residents’ Association were received and circulated to Members.

The Advisory Panel for Conservation Areas raised no objections to the application.

Ward Member and Committee Member Councillor Fawthrop, delivered a statement in objection to the application which can be viewed as Annex A to these Minutes.  Members’ attention was drawn to the description for the Petts Wood Area of Special Residential Character which was not referred to in the report.  A copy of this is also attached as Annex B.

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE REFUSED for the following reasons:-

1   The application is contrary to Policy H10 Appendix 1 paragraph 1.2(i) in that the development erodes the individual quality and character of the ASRC in that it introduces basement developments into both the Conservation Area and ASRC when none currently exist, severely eroding the nature and Character of the area.

2  The application is contrary to Policy BE11 in that it does not respect or compliment the layout, scale, form and materials of existing buildings and spaces, nor does it respect and incorporate the design, existing landscape or other features that contribute to the character, appearance or historic value of the Chislehurst Road Conservation Area in that there are no basements existing with the conservation area.

3  The density exceeds that in the surrounding area in breach of Policy H7 table 4.2 and H10 Appendix 1 paragraph 1.2 (ii) residential density shall accord with that existing in the area.

4  The proposal by reason of the introduction of a basement, represents a harmful destruction of a heritage asset as set out in Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v East Northamptonshire District Council and Others [2014] EWCA Civ 137 contrary to Policy BE11, H8 and H9 of the Unitary Development Plan.

5  The application would be seriously detrimental to the history, architecture and character of the Chislehurst Road Conservation Area contrary to Policy BE11 of the Unitary Development Plan.