5
The Committee considered report ES/0707 which gave details of the planning application for extensions and alterations to a detached dwelling at 4 Blyth Road, Southwold. The proposed extensions included adding a second floor room which would raise part of the existing ridgeline. The application was before Committee having regard to the scale and design of the development and the concerns raised by Southwold Town Council.
The report explained that the proposal sought to extend the property at ground floor level to create a large living space to the south and extend north into the rear garden to create a dining room, both with vaulted ceilings. The flat roof garage on the east side was to be replaced with a three storey extension providing a lookout lounge on the second floor. Revised plans had been received which had slightly reduced the height of the second floor element and the proposed zinc cladding was to be replaced with cedar boarding. Parking provision was in the front garden.
Members received a presentation showing the site location which was accessed via an unmade track, photographs of the property, street scene and other three storey buildings nearby; the existing, superseded and proposed elevations, floor plans for the three floors and how the proposal would sit within the plot. The roof height had been reduced in the revised plans and would be 1.5m higher than the existing ridge. The proposal would provide extensions at the front and rear, the garage was being replaced with an extension, and a second floor was to be added to the existing dwelling. It would remain a three-bedroomed property with the addition of a study and extra living space.
The Senior Planner explained that the second floor would provide an outlook towards Southwold common; car parking was to be provided at the front with additional hedging; and the proposal was not considered to be overdevelopment as there would still be reasonable garden space.
The Senior Planner drew attention to the material planning considerations and key issues with particular regard to the design, impact on surroundings including the AONB landscape and residential amenity. There was a mix of dwelling types in the vicinity and whilst the development would result in a significant change to the existing building, the proposal was considered to be most interesting and not cause significant harm to the street scene and landscape, or be unduly harmful to the amenity of neighbours. Approval was therefore being recommended.
The Chairman invited the public speakers to address the Committee.
Mr M Ladd thanked Members for being given the opportunity to speak. He confirmed he was Chairman of the Southwold Millennium Trust who owned land to the north of Blyth Road and that he sent in an objection on behalf of the Trustees. He confirmed he was also a Suffolk County Councillor for Southwold and confirmed his objection to the application, having been closely working with the Town Council to develop the old fire station site since the fire station had moved to Reydon. The old site adjacent to this application was soon to be redeveloped by Hastoe Housing Association and used for much needed affordable housing for Southwold. Whilst having no objection to the redevelopment of 4 Blyth Road, the design might be interesting but it was in the wrong place. The overall scale of the proposal was out of keeping with existing properties, in particular the second floor, and although slightly reduced, the lookout lounge and balcony would cause overlooking and loss of privacy and would have a negative impact on residents’ amenity of both current and future neighbours. The reduced the ridge height was welcomed but nearby properties of a similar height did not have lookout stations in the roof space. The application could only be considered to be dominating and overbearing, and there would be loss of privacy to neighbours. With that in mind, the Committee needed to seriously look at the application.
On behalf of the Southwold Town Council, Ms Jeans thanked the officer for a fair presentation and requested slides be shared to show the Hastoe development being proposed on the former police and fire station sites. She was concerned about the overlooking onto these two sites and the back gardens of the proposed development and the overall impact on the much needed accommodation including affordable housing that was to be provided. It was not necessary for the proposed extensions to have a lookout lounge on what was likely to be a holiday let. Also, there would be a considerable amount of looking down into the back gardens due to be built on the adjoining site. The design did not fit the character of Blyth Road, most properties were humble two storey dwellings and consideration should be given to the context of everything in the vicinity. Here was not in the right place. The proposed social housing for the fire station site (as shown on the slide) was in character with the area. This glitzy house was not in character and did not fit with the character of Blyth Road or the common as locals would agree. There were specific reasons for the type of new houses on Station Yard because of flood conditions and a pre-existing consent; that did not apply here. The Town Council disagreed with the application and it should be refused.
On behalf of the Applicant, Mr N Haward thanked the officer for an accurate representation of the scheme. He wished to make a few points including the fact that the lookout lounge would take advantage of the views over the common and to the water tower and long views to the northern marsh. In response to comments from Southwold Town Council, he and the applicant had looked at the reviewing the scheme to accommodate comments and, as a result, the roof height had been reduced and the finishes simplified. By setting back the glass balustrading, loss of privacy would not happen with their proposal. The windows had been very carefully placed so there was no loss of privacy and no extra overlooking to immediate neighbours. There were three storey buildings in the area, so it was difficult to understand that only 2½ storey was acceptable. They had worked on a scheme and tried to satisfy negative comments. The applicant was willing to develop in Southwold and the individual design should not be discouraged. It would make a great house and was worthy of support.
Members asked questions relating to:
• How could windows with potential to overlook not create an impact.
• Second floor windows would impact on all four elevations.
Mr Haward advised that the window glass screening was set back, therefore allowing for a long view and not a view downwards. There were windows on the rear elevation of the existing property and the proposed upper floor would provide for a long vista.
Members sought clarification as to the planning permission on the fire station site and the Planners confirm that there was currently no consent on that site.
Ward Councillor Beavan advised that it was not desirable to have any more buildings in Southwold with lookouts and balconies; it might be great for the owners to look over everything but not for everyone else. He accepted the point made that the inside room might restrict views but as soon as anyone stepped out on the balcony people would overlook neighbours and see everything. The balcony needed to be dropped from the application.
Members raised issues with regard to the following:
• Taking into account future development on the adjoining sites.
• Additional windows being proposed.
• Comments from Highways.
• Orientation of the balcony and why there would be no overlooking.
• Advanced status of the Neighbourhood Plan and the fact that this application might affect the proposal for the fire station site.
• How these alterations might affect and detract from the attraction of the proposed development.
The Senior Planner advised that the fire station site was currently undeveloped and a scheme was expected to come forward in due course. County Highways had made no comment. The inverted dormer window system would provide screening from the nearest neighbour. In clarifying the location of the windows on first floor and new stairway, the Senior Planner advised that the second floor window could be obscure glazed if Members thought necessary. The balcony faced Blyth Road to the front and also over the rear garden towards the fire station site. The balcony was screened by the roof from the next door neighbour and there was currently no development on the fire station site to overlook, nor any formal application plans for consideration. The Senior Planner advised that the Neighbourhood Plan was in its early stages and the fire station site was referred to as a mix of residential/commercial development.
Councillor Beavan confirmed that the Neighbourhood plan was currently at the Regulation 14 stage, then the Regulation 16 referendum would be in November.
The Planning Manager advised that until the Neighbourhood Plan was adopted it was not part of the Development Plan and therefore would not carry significant weight at this point in time. The layout of the fire station site would need to take into account the area at the time a planning application was submitted. The balcony was set into the roof and therefore views would be limited. Future development in the area would have to respond to what was on this site. Members needed to consider applications in the order they were presented to Committee and, therefore, how this application might affect existing properties only.
Whilst Members’ concerns were expressed and certain reservations over the striking design in this particular location as not being acceptable, a proposal to approve the application was duly seconded. The design and the reduced roof height made the proposal satisfactory. It was proposed that the side windows be obscure glazed and this additional condition was supported by the proposer and seconder. There being no further discussion, it was
RESOLVED
That permission be granted, 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 the following drawings, 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:-
Site Plan received 4/12/20
Proposed site plan received 04/12/20
Proposed Elevations received 10/02/21
Proposed GF plan rev A received 10/02/21
Proposed FF plan Rev C received 10/02/21
Proposed SF plan received 10/02/21
Supplementary information: Proposed S, W and N elevations and general section received 10/02/21
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.
3. The materials and finishes shall be as indicated within the submitted application and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity.
4. Within 3 month(s) of commencement of development, satisfactory precise details of a hedge planting scheme (which shall include species, size and numbers of plants to be planted) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure the submission and implementation of a well-laid out scheme of landscaping in the interest of visual amenity.
5. The approved hedge planting scheme shall be implemented not later than the first planting season following commencement of the development (or within such extended period as the local planning authority may allow) and shall thereafter be retained and maintained for a period of 5 years. Any plant material removed, dying or becoming seriously damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced within the first available planting season and shall be retained and maintained.
Reason: To ensure the submission and implementation of a well-laid out scheme of landscaping in the interest of visual amenity.
6. The windows in the side elevations at first floor level and above shall be fitted with obscure glazing and thereafter retained as such.
Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring residents from undue overlooking.