Agenda item

Erection of porch to front and two storey rear extension.

The Committee considered a report of the Planning Officer regarding the proposed erection of a porch to front and two storey rear extension (for copy see file of minutes).

The Team Leader North provided a detailed presentation which included photographs of the site and plans of the proposed layout. Members had also visited the site the previous day and were familiar with the setting and surroundings.

It was noted that the application submitted was identical to that which had been previously refused and confirmed at appeal by the Planning Inspectorate.

Councillor T Smith, local member, addressed the committee to speak in support of the application. She advised members that along this stretch of terraced homes a number of which had two storey extensions which set a precedent for others in the area. Due to the pitch of the roof on these properties the upstairs space was unsuitable for family living and with such had led to a host of properties being bought to let, causing in itself tenant problems for existing residents and local members.

In addition to the above, the owner’s adult son had additional needs and with such required additional space and room for his own independence. In addition the bathroom was currently located on the ground floor which also caused problems.

In conclusion she advised that neighbours had not objected to the application as many of them also wanted to extend their properties to allow for better family living. She considered the extension to be sustainable and would in addition promote healthy communities.

The Team Leader North referred to the decision of the Planning Inspector who had found that that the depth of the extension would have an overbearing and significant impact on neighbouring residents.

Discussion ensued regarding the size of the extension and it was noted that a reduced size extension without overbearing impact on residents may be deemed acceptable. Councillor Milburn asked what size extension would be deemed acceptable as she did agree that these dwellings were no longer suitable for families.

Councillor Hopgood in sympathising with the applicants personal circumstances suggested that the application be deferred in order for the applicant to work with planners to reach a suitable compromise. The Team Leader North added that although deferment was frustrating for the applicant, it would be considered appropriate under the circumstances.

Councillor Hopgood MOVED that the application be deferred.

Councillor Bell SECONDED the motion.

Following a vote being taken it was:-

Resolved: That the application be deferred to allow further discussions with the planners and applicant in order to submit a revised application which would be deemed acceptable.