Issue - meetings

1. The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 18/00861/HOUSE in respect of the construction of a single storey rear extension and a two storey extension at Cherry Hinton, Newbury Hill. Hampstead Norreys.
2. In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Councillor David Barlow, Parish Council representative, and Ms Teresa Fleetwood, Mr Andy Wilcock, Mr Michael Binns, objectors, addressed the Committee on this application.
3. Derek Carnegie introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy and other material considerations. In conclusion the reports detailed that the proposals were acceptable and conditional approval was justifiable. Officers on balance recommended the Committee grant planning permission.
4. Paul Goddard advised that there would be no change to the access to the property and there was sufficient parking. A condition to minimise disruption during construction was recommended.
5. Councillor Barlow in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         17 letters objecting to the application had been received by the Council.

·         It was disappointing that the Conservation Officer had been unable to comment on the application as the site was close to the conservation area and in his opinion constituted overdevelopment of the site.

·         Cherry Hinton was visible from 1 and 2 Church Street, flint walled properties built in 1910.

·         The Parish Council had been unanimous in its objection to the proposed extension.

·         Neighbours would be overlooked and there would be detriment to their wellbeing and privacy.

·         It was possible to extend the house on the other side without impact on neighbours.

·         It would be contrary to the Council’s Core Strategy and the NPPF to approve the application

6.    Councillor Garth Simpson asked to be shown the location of Cherry Hinton in relation to the conservation area. Councillor Barlow indicated the location of the conservation area on the block plan.

7. Ms Fleetwood, Mr Wilcock, Mr Binns in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         Mr Wilcock explained that he lived at 1 Church Street which bordered Cherry Hinton.

·         He did not object to the single storey rear extension but the side extension was shocking in terms of scale and impact.

·         The case officer had written to the applicant regarding the dominance and private amenity impact of the proposals. Plans were resubmitted and the reduction in size from the original plans was less than 10%.

·         There would be a direct view from the rear of the property into 1 Church Street’s courtyard garden and a frosted window was not sufficient to reduce the impact on privacy.

·         There would be a significant impact on the amount of light his property received because the extension would be only a foot away from the boundary and 15ft from the house. There was already a 4ft ground level difference and the extension would be 20ft tall.

·         The block plan shown to the Committee was incorrect.

·         The case officer’s concerns regarding the dominance and private amenity impact of the proposals had not been adequately addressed and the recommendation to grant planning permission was unjustified.

·         It was possible for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12