Agenda item

REFUSED

Description of application – Single storey rear extension.

Oral representations in support of the application were received.  Oral representations from Ward Member, Councillor Graham Arthur, in objection to the application were received at the meeting.

Councillor Arthurreferred to planning appeal 17/00472/FULL1 and its reason for dismissal.  The excessive rearward projection of 4.9 metres and height of 3.75 metres along the adjoining boundary would have given rise to a significant loss of amenityto the adjoining neighbouring property at No.12.  The applicant had now reduced the height of the proposal by 0.275 metres andangled the extension away by 45 degrees beyond 3.9 metres to 4.9 metres and Councillor Arthur’s view was that 4.9 metres remained excessive.

The Chief Planner’s representative reported that a letter from the applicant had been received and circulated to Members and two drawings had been also been submitted and he explained the measurements on the drawings.

The Chairman and Councillor Michael agreed with the Ward Member that the applicant had made an insufficient reduction in the size and scale of the proposed development.

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

1.  The proposed extension would, by reason of its excessive rearward projection, have a seriously detrimental effect on the outlook and prospect which the occupants of the adjoining dwelling might reasonably expect to be able to continue to enjoy, contrary to Policies BE1 and H8 of the Unitary Development Plan, Supplementary Planning Guidance No 1 General Design Principles and No 2 Residential Design Guidance and Draft Policies 6 and 37 of the Proposed Submission Draft Local Plan.