Agenda item

PERMISSION

Description of application - Detached outbuilding at rear (retrospective application)

Oral representations in objection to the application were received at the meeting.

In response to questions from the Vice-Chairman and Councillor Peter Dean, the objector said that if the applicant added an additional locking door to the right of the front door, this would allow access through the office, utility room, and store into the garden and therefore the outbuilding could be accessed without going through the main house.

The Chairman enquired if the objector had forwarded any evidence of the outbuilding being used as separate living accommodation to Planning Enforcement. The objector confirmed that she had submitted photo evidence.

The Development Management Team Leader – Major Developments reported that additional photos had been circulated to Members.

In response to questions, the Development Management Team Leader – Major Developments said that the front elevation of the property appeared to be blocked off at present. With regards to conditioning the outbuilding so it could not be used as a self-contained living unit, the Development Management Team Leader – Major Developments advised that a condition was already proposed for use to be restricted to ‘incidental’. It was also suggested that further conditions be added – no primary cooking facilities be installed or undertaken; the side window to be obscure glazed; and the removal of Class E Permitted Development rights so no further structures could be erected in the garden without planning consent. These conditions were effective – if they were breached it was at the applicant’s risk and would be subject to formal planning enforcement action. It was noted that the outbuilding contained a bathroom, which was not unusual – the internal floor area was 30 sqm which was too small for it to be used as a single dwelling. Regarding concerns in relation to the retrospective element of this application, the Development Management Team Leader – Major Developments highlighted that, although applicants were advised that if they built without planning consent it was at their own risk, it was not an offence to build, and retrospective planning permission could be sought under the Town and Country Planning Act.

Members having considered the report, objections and representations, RESOLVED that PERMISSION BE GRANTED as recommended, subject to the conditions set out in the report of the Assistant Director, Planning with the addition of further conditions to read:-

3.  N Non-standard no primary cooking facilities;

No primary cooking facilities shall be installed or undertaken within the outbuilding hereby permitted.

Reason:  In the interests of the amenities of nearby residential properties and to accord with Policies 37 and 6 of the Bromley Local Plan.

4.  N Non-standard obscure glazing to side windows;

The window(s) in the flank elevation(s) shall be obscure glazed to a minimum of Pilkington privacy Level 3 and be non-opening within 3 months of the date of this decision notice and shall be permanently retained in accordance as such for perpetuity.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities of nearby residential properties and to accord with Policies 37 and 6 of the Bromley Local Plan.

5.  ND Non-standard condition Removal of Class E PD rights;

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order amending, revoking and re-enacting this Order) no building, structure, extension, enlargement or alteration permitted by Class E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the 2015 Order (as amended), shall be erected or made within the curtilage(s) of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of protecting the character of the area and residential amenity of neighbouring properties in accordance with Policy 37 of the Bromley Local Plan.