Agenda item

Erection of dormer bungalow and garage (retrospective). [Acomb Ward] [Site Visit].

Members considered a full application by Mr J M Armitage for the erection of a dormer bungalow and garage (retrospective).

Officers updated that paragraph 3.3 of the report should refer to 8 objections having been received rather than 5 as stated and that an additional bullet point should be added to read ”loss of outlook, dwelling looms over rear gardens” They also stated that an additional letter of objection had been received in response to the amended plans and that one letter had been received stating no objection.

Written comments from Councillor Simpson-Laing were circulated to Members of the Committee. She expressed concerns that the development had progressed so far before the Council became aware it had been built in the wrong place and that no Stop Notice had been issued. She also noted that the new development was now clearly visible from Boroughbridge Road which caused a visual intrusion and visual “massing issue” and requested confirmation that the distance between the new property and surrounding existing properties meets the minimum required distance.

Representations were received from a local resident on behalf of neighbours in objection to the application. She stated that the application did not fulfil the expectations of Policy GP1 as it overshadows, overbears and dominates other properties and is also contrary to Policy GP10 in that none of the existing trees are shown on the plans. She suggested that if the correct site measurements had been available at the time the reserved matters application was determined,  this may not have been approved and asked that the plans be further revised to reduce the scale of the development.

Representations were also received from the agent in support of the application. She advised Members that when the appeal for outline planning permission was determined by the Planning Inspectorate, the inspector had noted the 21m separation distance between the proposed property and the neighbour most affected and had noted the rear extension to the neighbour’s property but had been happy with this. He reminded Members that the majority of properties in Beckfield Lane have long gardens and are therefore all at least 21m away from the bungalow.

Members considered the concerns raised by local residents and noted that the development now affected neighbours in a different way than would have been previously envisaged and that it was now more obvious to those living to the rear of the site. They noted that the site was now materially different to when the inspector visited it and the information on which the inspector had based his comments was no longer accurate, and that the application would need to be considered further.

RESOLVED:            

That the application be refused.

REASON:

Because of its height and bulk, its location on the site and the consequent loss of trees, the dormer bungalow will result in a form of development that is overbearing and will dominate the outlook from adjoining residential properties. The dormer bungalow is therefore considered to harm the living conditions of the adjoining dwellings which is contrary to the following policies of the Development Control Local Plan:

Policy GP1 which states that development proposals will be expected to be of a layout, scale, mass and design that is compatible with neighbouring buildings and ensure that residents living nearby are not unduly dominated by overbearing structures;

Policy GP10 which states that planning permission will only be granted for the sub-division of existing garden areas where this would not be detrimental to the amenity of the local environment, and;

Policy H4a which states that proposals for residential development will be granted where it is of an appropriate scale to surrounding development.

The proposal is also considered to be contrary to National planning policies contained within PPS1"Delivering Sustainable Development" and PPS3 "Housing".