Issue - meetings

Refused

Description of Application: Minor material amendment comprising of variation of conditions 2 and 4 of planning Application Reference: DC/19/03568/FULL6 for demolition of existing conservatory and erection of single storey ground floor extension to the side, elevational alterations to provide roof over extended bungalow with habitable accommodation in the roof space and rooflights to sides/front - to allow for incorporating sliding doors and juliet balconies and the use of new slate tiles instead of retaining existing tiles.

The Head of Development Management provided a brief introduction to the application and said that the application lay within the Green Belt. He showed Members some photos of the house as altered. It was noted that the application was retrospective.

The officer recommendation was that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions as outlined in the report.

Oral representations were heard in support of the application.  

Ward Councillor Richard Scoates was not present at the meeting, but he requested that the following statement be read out and recorded in the minutes:

‘I do not have objections to the minor alteration to condition 4, but i do object to the variation of condition 2 to allow larger sliding windows and Juliet balconies. This condition was given in the previous permission to protect the neighbouring property's amenities from being overlooked. There is a only a small separation strip between Kinross and Little Orchard which will result in overlooking into the garden and through a bedroom window of Little Orchard.

Condition 2 allowed the previous application to be acceptable, and removing it will defeat the object of conditioning an approval when considering the pros and cons of an application. I would therefore ask the committee to approve a split decision to allow changes to condition 4 for the roof tiles, but to refuse alterations to condition 2 on the grounds that it would be to the detriment of the neighbours residential amenity.’

The Council's legal representative advised the Chairman that it would not be possible to approve a split decision. Only a Planning Inspector could approve that.

Members, having considered the report objections and representations RESOLVED THAT THE APPLICATION BE REFUSED for the following reason:

The proposed alterations would have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of the neighbouring property, by reason of increased opportunities for overlooking and a loss of privacy, contrary to Policies 6 and 37 of the Bromley Local Plan.