Agenda item

This full application is for the erection of a first floor extension above an existing attached converted garage on the side elevation which is attached to the garage of the adjacent dwelling at 3 Meam Close.

The application has been called in for consideration by the Committee by Councillor Warters on the following issues;

 - Over development of the site

-  Parking Issues related to the proposal

-  Impact on neighbour amenity

-  Drainage/sewerage concerns

 [Osbaldwick] [Site Visit]

Members considered a full application by Mr and Mrs Luke-Wakes for a first floor side extension.

Members asked Officers questions which related to a loss of parking at the property and if an assessment had been carried out by Council Highways Officers at the property.

In response, Officers stated that it was felt that the proposal complied with the maximum provision for car parking and that as a parking assessment had been carried out by Highways Officers on neighbouring properties, it was not felt necessary to inspect 1 Meam Close.

Representations in objection to the application were received from a local resident. He highlighted concerns about parking such as; that the use of the property by students increased the number of vehicles, which often parked on both sides of the road. He also told Members that the grassed area opposite the property was currently used as a play area, which he felt would be used as additional parking space if the extension was built.

Further representations in objection were received from the next door neighbour. His concerns related to a loss of his personal privacy, in that the use of the property for student housing he felt had added to additional noise. He added that there would be a loss of light on to his property if the extension was built.

Representations in support were received from the applicant’s architect. In response to concerns about the use of the property as a student residence, he felt that Members should not consider the future use of the house, when making their decision. He added that the property did have space for an additional car parking space.

Questions from Members to Officers included the following;

-      If a loss of privacy to the neighbouring property could be addressed.

-      The distance of the shed (to be used for cycle storage), from the wall of the neighbouring property

-      How storage at the back of the house would be accessed

In response, Officers stated that the application was not considered to increase the amount of overlooking and that the ground floor window could be installed under permitted development rights. In relation to the shed, Officers added that a condition could be added for further information to be provided.

Some Members felt that the location of the shed and parking concerns were not relevant to the consideration of the application, but that a terracing effect would be visible if the extension was approved. They also added that the window in the rear elevation of the extension would overlook the neighbouring property significantly.

RESOLVED:       That the application be refused.

REASON:    (i)    It is considered that the first floor extension would create an incongruous feature by occupying part of the gap above the adjoining garages to Nos. 1 and 3 Meam Close, which acts as visual transition between the 3 and 2 storey dwellings along the row, and which have different roof designs. The gap provides an important break along the row, and its erosion would be detrimental to the design of the dwellings and the street scene. The development would, therefore, conflict with national planning advice in relation to design contained within paragraphs 33 and 34 of Planning Policy Statement 1 ("Delivering Sustainable Development"), Policies GP1 (a and b) and H7 (a, b and e) of the City of York Draft Local Plan (April 2005), and with the Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance "A Guide to Extensions and Alterations to Private Dwelling Houses" (March 2001).

                (ii)         The height and location of the proposed rear window of the extension, close to the shared boundary with No 3 Meam Close, would be likely to lead to an unacceptable degree of overlooking and loss of privacy from the private rear garden of the that dwelling. This would be to the detriment of the standard of amenity that the occupiers of that property could reasonably expect to enjoy. The proposal would, therefore, conflict with national planning advice in relation to design contained within Planning Policy Statement 1 ("Delivering Sustainable Development"), Policies GP1 (a, b and c) and H7 (a, b and e) of the City of York Draft Local Plan, and with the Council's Supplementary Planning Guidance "A Guide to Extensions and Alterations to Private Dwelling Houses" March 2001.