Agenda item

One and two storey extensions to front and side. [Rural West York Ward] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application by Mr Paul Horsman for one and two storey extensions to the front and side of the property.

Officers provided a verbal update on this application. They advised that a further letter of objection had been received from the occupant at number 3 Lynwood Close stating that the plot was too small, the extension would be an eyesore and it would impact on parking in the cul-de-sac.

They advised that paragraph 4.3 of the report which refers to the City of York Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance does not refer directly to building lines and quoted from paragraph 1.13 of the guidance which states that extending forward of the building line should be avoided: Only in exceptional circumstances will this be appropriate for example, where the building line is not well defined. They noted that a revised plan had been received which showed the proposed front bay window on plan and revised the fence detail with the neighbour,  and condition 3 (approved plans) would be suitably amended .

Representations were received from a neighbour at 8 Lynwood Close in objection to the application due to concerns over massing. He stated that the extension would extend the whole width and height of the house and bring the front forward by over 2 metres (stating that it would be a 100 cubic metre increase to the frontage of house) thereby dominating his own property. Furthermore he stated that the design and scale was not appropriate to the original building. He advised that the light assessment which had been carried out indicated that it would affect the amount of light to his own property during the afternoon and stated that the proposals would cause significant harm to the amenity of neighbours.

Representations were also received from the applicant’s architect in support of the application. He stated that the design for the extension had been put together with the Village Design Statement in mind and that the proposals would not dramatically change the nature of the area, would not impose on other properties detrimentally and would have a minimal effect of overshadowing. He confirmed that the stepping of the building line would be maintained and obscured glazing would be used where required to prevent overlooking. In response to a question regarding the potential reduction in a car parking space, he confirmed that there would be one garage space and one driveway parking space.

Members acknowledged neighbours concerns regarding overlooking but were of the opinion that this issue had been resolved through the design and a high fence. They discussed the issue of overshadowing and whether there would be a loss of light to some properties and noted that this would be minimal and only affect the front of some properties noting that the neighbours all have reasonable sized plots. They also raised concerns about the loss of an off road parking space but acknowledged that condition 5 required the garage to be retained for parking vehicles and bicycles.

RESOLVED:             That the application be approved subject to the conditions listed in the report.

REASON:                  The proposal, subject to the conditions listed in the report, would not cause undue harm to interests of acknowledged importance, with particular reference to the appearance of the dwelling, streetscene and residential amenity. As such the proposal complies with Policies GP1 and H7 of the City of York Development Control Local Plan, the 'Guide to extensions and alterations to private dwelling houses' Supplementary Planning Guidance and the Copmanthorpe Village Design Statement.