7
The Committee received report ES/1708 of the Head of Planning and Coastal Management, which related to planning application DC/23/2979/FUL. The application sought planning permission to construct two small flat roofed extensions onto the rear and side of Stones Throw Cottage, Station Road, Woodbridge.
As the applicant was a member of East Suffolk Council the application was before the Committee for determination in accordance with the scheme of delegation set out in the East Suffolk Council Constitution.
The Committee received a presentation from the Assistant Planner, who was the case officer for the application. The Committee was advised that the application had been submitted in concert with a listed building consent application, which was also on the meeting agenda for consideration.
The site's location was outlined and the proposed block plan was displayed. The Committee also received the existing and proposed floor plans and elevations.
The Assistant Planner displayed photographs demonstrating a variety of views from within the application site showing the host dwelling, garden, and the existing rear extension. The Committee was also shown photographs taken from the rear garden of a neighbouring dwelling towards the application site; the Assistant Planner outlined the concerns received from said neighbour regarding loss of light and residential amenity.
The material considerations were summarised as residential amenity, heritage, and design. The recommendation to approve the application was set out.
The Chair invited questions to the officers. Councillor Hedgley sought more detail on the objections received from the neighbour; the Assistant Planner advised that the new extensions would move the eaves height of the host dwelling closer to the shared boundary and that officers were of the view that given the size and scale of the host dwelling the proposals would not cause a loss of light to the neighbouring property.
Councillor McCallum noted that the existing terrace looked into the neighbouring garden and sought clarity of the position of the eaves of the new extension. The Assistant Planner explained that the eaves of the new extension would be the same height as those of the existing extension and would be 0.8 metres away from the boundary at the nearest point; he added that there would be no extension of the existing terrace and that the neighbour's privacy would not be impacted by the new development.
The Assistant Planner confirmed to Councillor Smithson that there would be no direct route from the garden to the front of the property that would not require entering the property, and suggested that the applicant's agent could expand on this.
In response to Councillor Ninnmey, the Assistant Planner explained that both the applicant and the neighbour maintained shrub planting on the boundary, which could be removed if they so wished.
The Chair invited Mr McNeil, the applicant's agent, to address the Committee. Mr McNeil said that the primary aim of the proposals was to provide sanitary facilities, habitable space and a link to the garden room at the rear of the garden. Mr McNeil said the proposals had been designed to located in the most appropriate area and in accordance with the existing external drainage. Mr McNeil noted that a bin store would be maintained as part of the development.
Mr McNeil considered the proposed development made best use of available space, highlighting that the garden room was already a much-used facility and would be directly accessible from the host dwelling. Mr McNeil said the proposed extension would not significantly impact light or residential amenity and and that the existing roof terrace would not be extended. Mr McNeil added that the development would be relatively unseen from the front of the property.
The Chair invited questions to Mr McNeil. In response to Councillor Plummer, Mr McNeil confirmed that access to the rear garden from the front of the property would be via the interior of the dwelling.
The Chair invited the Committee to debate the application that was before it. Councillor McCallum proposed that the application be approved as recommended, noting that there were no grounds to refuse it on. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Hedgley.
Councillor Ninnmey highlighted that there was an increasing need for people to relocate sanitary facilities to the ground floor and asked if there was a specific policy relating to this issue. The Planning Manager replied that there was no specific policy and that officers looked at adaptation planning applications, such as the one being considered, as favourably as possible in accordance with national and local planning policies.
There being no further debate, the Chair moved to a vote and it was unanimously
RESOLVED
That the application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:
1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.
2. The development hereby permitted shall be completed in all respects strictly in accordance with 631-01 Rev B received 28/07/2023, for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.
3. Prior to commencement of any works, details in respect of the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:
(i) Details of the external materials to be used for the extensions.
(ii) Details of all new windows to include: appearance; position within opening; method of opening; materials and finish; heads and cills; type of glazing; glazing bar profiles; and ironmongery.
(iii) Details of all new external and internal doors to include: appearance; materials and finish; frame and architrave; type of glazing; panel profiles; and ironmongery.
The work shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: In order to safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the building.
Informatives:
1. The Local Planning Authority has assessed the proposal against all material considerations including planning policies and any comments that may have been received. The planning application has been approved in accordance with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework and local plan to promote the delivery of sustainable development and to approach decision taking in a positive way.