Agenda item

(Councillor Richard Crumly rejoined the meeting)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(2)) concerning Planning Application 13/02394/HOUSE in respect of the removal of a flat roofed, single storey extension and the development of a two storey and single storey extension.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr Tony Renouf, Parish Council representative and Mr Andrew Robinson, applicant, addressed the Committee on this application.

Mr Renouf in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·              The application was supported by the Parish Council who acknowledged that the amended proposals addressed previous concerns and offered improvements to the overall appearance of the property.

·              The application was thought to offer a more aesthetically pleasing property which was not detrimental to the surrounding area and supported by neighbours.

·              The property was somewhat visible when accessing Woolhampton but was mainly obscured by the tress when in leaf.

·              The proposed volume increase of the development was not significant when compared to the current size of the property. The original dwelling was modest in size but the property had been extended over a period of time.

·              The property was already disproportionate in size when compared to its original state, therefore, ENV24 guidance was not applicable.

·              It was questionable whether any proposal on the site would be deemed satisfactory by the planning authority due to the current size of the property. Current extensions were well established and the proposal was not thought to pose a detrimental impact to the surrounding area and countryside.

Mr Robinson in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·              The original property was developed in 1960 and was modest in size, the property was then extended in 1961.

·              The first application was lost at appeal because it was thought that the site lay within an area of outstanding beauty, which was not the case.

·              The current application proposed a total volume increase of 3.4% which was predominantly a result of the proposed pitched roof.

·              The application proposed a compact design and make over of the current property to improve and enhance the family home.

·              He felt that the basis for any application being approved on the site was to decrease the overall size of the existing property.

·              He disagreed with the Officers report which suggested that the application failed to comply with ENV24. He felt that the application offered an improved development, remaining with the current footprint of the existing property and only increased in volume due to the inclusion of a pitched roof.

·              The application was supported by neighbours.

Councillor Irene Neill, speaking as Ward Member, in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·              She failed to understand why Officers had not recommended approval for the application, the application proposed a slight volume increase within the existing footprint.

·              The development would improve the appearance of the property and provide necessary improvements overall.

·              The application was supported by the Parish Council and neighbours in the surrounding area.

Councillor Richard Crumly expressed his view that often people submitted letters of objection but it was rare that an application received letters of support. It was therefore considered that the application was strongly supported by the local community.

David Pearson explained to the Committee that the last application had been assessed by Officers using ENV24 in a consistent manner. Refusal based on this assessment had subsequently been supported at appeal.David Pearson felt that the current application had been assessed using the same methodology and drawing the same conclusion as before although Officers agreed that the development was an improvement on the previous application.

Councillor Pamela Bale highlighted on page 22 of the report that an additional single storey extension could be added to the property without planning consent which suggested that an applicant could continue to extend the property in this manner without consideration toward the appearance of the overall property. It was suggested that if the application approved permitted development rights should be restricted to limit any further smaller scale developments.

Councillor Alan Law expressed his view that the current application offered an improvement to the overall appearance of the property and proposed that the planning authority grant planning permission. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Graham Pask.

Councillor Geoff Mayes suggested that the proposal included the conditions for the quality of the brickwork to be inspected by Officers and to consider whether the use of sash windows was appropriate for the style of development.

Councillor Crumly felt the application offered a promising improvement and acknowledged that the application was supported by neighbours.

Councillor Brian Bedwell agreed with the comments from the Committee but queried whether approving planning permission would set a precedent in the area.

In response to questions asked, Cheryl Willett explained that the use of sash windows was considered consistent with the overall development design and that the pre-mentioned conditions would be included within the proposal.

RESOLVED that the Head of Planning and Countryside be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1.   The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

      Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2.   No development shall take place until a schedule of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted and plans showing the accurate application of each material has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority by way of conditions discharge application. This condition shall apply irrespective of any indications as to these matters which have been detailed in the current application. Samples of the materials shall be made available for inspection on request. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved materials.

Reason: To ensure that the external materials are visually attractive and respond to local character, and to clarify where each material will be applied. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy ENV24 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007), Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006), Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/2 House Extensions (July 2004) and Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/4 Replacement Dwellings and Extensions to Dwellings in the Countryside (July 2004).

3.   The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawing numbers LP/L/01 A, LP/L/02 D, LP/GA/01 D, LP/GA/02 D, LP/GA/03 D, LP/GA/05 E, and LP/GA/06 D validated on 10th October 2013 and drawing number LP/GA/04 E received on 20^th November 2013.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

4.   Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended) (or any order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that Order), no extensions, alterations, buildings or other development which would otherwise be permitted by Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C and E of that Order shall be carried out, without planning permission being granted by the Local Planning Authority on an application made for that purpose.

Reason: The site is located within the countryside and measures are in place to prevent the overdevelopment of sites and a material increase in visual intrusion in the landscape. As Little Paddocks has already been greatly extended it is appropriate for the Local Planning Authority to examine further proposals for extensions, alterations and outbuildings to assess whether these would be appropriate to the character of the dwelling, the site and to the local area. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy ENV24 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007), Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006), Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/2 House Extensions (July 2004) and Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/4 Replacement Dwellings and Extensions to Dwellings in the Countryside (July 2004).

5.   The extensions hereby approved shall not be occupied until the attached garage has been demolished in its entirety.

Reason: To secure the order of development on site, and as the application has been assessed on the understanding that single storey structures will be demolished to enable the permitted extensions. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy ENV24 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007), Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006), Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/2 House Extensions (July 2004) and Supplementary Planning Guidance 04/4 Replacement Dwellings and Extensions to Dwellings in the Countryside (July 2004).

6.   No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority by way of a conditions discharge application. The statement shall provide for:

(a) The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;

(b) Loading and unloading of plant and materials;

(c) Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development;

(d) Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;

Thereafter the demolition and construction works shall incorporate and be undertaken in accordance with the approved statement.

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjoining land uses and occupiers, and in the interests of highway safety. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy OVS6 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007), and Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

7.   No demolition or construction works shall take place outside the following hours:

7:30am to 6:00pm Mondays to Fridays; 8:30am to 1:00pm Saturdays; nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of adjoining land uses and occupiers. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026) and Policy OVS6 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).