Agenda item

Front and Rear Two Storey Extensions

The Committee considered a report of the Principal Planning Officer (Easington Area) regarding the erection of a front and rear two storey extension at 51 Ocean View, Blackhall (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Principal Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the application which included photographs of the site.

Councillor Crute, local Member, addressed the Committee.  While he appreciated that planning officers were constrained by NPPF guidance, he expressed a hope that common sense could prevail.  There would be no overshadowing caused by the development because the property faced a westerly direction; there would be no adverse visual impact on the street scene because the proposed extension would be a long way from the street line; there were extensions of a similar design already in the area; there was no adverse public perception because all neighbouring properties had been consulted and no objections had been received.  Indeed, at a recent residents association meeting there were no objections and some expressions of support for this type of development.

Mr G Fallow, applicant, addressed the Committee.  The existing rear extension at the property extended by some 3 to 4 metres and the proposed extension would be 5.1 metres, which would be well within local guidelines.  Although local guidelines stated that a front extension should only extend up to 1.5 metres, the property was well set back from the street and consideration should be given to waiving the 1.5 metre guideline on this occasion.  There would be virtually no overshadowing because of the location of the property and the travel of the sun.  The footprint of the proposed development would be less than 100% of the existing property, and would result in plot usage of less than 31%, due to the large size of the gardens.

The Principal Planning Officer replied to the points raised.  Some degree of overshadowing would occur to the detached property to the north.  While it was accepted that the extension would be set back from the edge of the street, it was too large in overall size terms.  It was also accepted that there had been no objections from neighbouring properties, however, there was a need to protect the amenities of neighbours and the environment.  The current rear extension was only single storey.

Resolved:

That the application be approved for the following reasons: the proposals were not considered to have such an adverse effect on the amenities of neighbours or the appearance of the street scene to justify refusal of planning permission