|
TCP/25625/A P/00104/04 |
Demolition of garage & conservatory; replacement conservatory; 2 storey side extension to form replacement garage with 2 bedrooms over; 2 storey rear extension to provide additional living accommodation, (revised scheme). 36 Coronation Avenue, Cowes, Isle Of Wight, PO318PN |
|
Officer: A Pegram |
Tel No: (01983) 823566 |
This application was considered at the meeting of the Development Control Committee held on 11 May 2004 when Members resolved to defer the matter for negotiations to see if the impact on the neighbouring property could be reduced. Following the meeting discussions were held on site with the applicants who have subsequently submitted a letter to the Authority requesting that the matter is referred back to the Committee for consideration as submitted. In this letter, the applicants indicate that they would be prepared to provide screening along the boundary between their property and No. 34 Coronation Avenue by reinforcing the existing trees and shrubs in this area. In addition, should Members feel it necessary, applicants have indicated that they would be happy for Members of the Committee to visit their property if they feel this will assist in their consideration of the proposal.
REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
Report requested by local Member, Cllr R G Mazillius,
as he is not prepared to agree to the application being dealt with under the
delegated procedure as he considers that extension would have an unreasonably
adverse impact detracting from the amenity and enjoyment of the neighbouring
property.
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
This is a minor application, the processing of which
has taken 10 weeks and 4 days to the date of the Committee meeting. The application has gone beyond the
prescribed 8 week period for determination of planning application due to the
request by local Member for consideration by Committee.
LOCATION SITE CHARACTERISTICS
Coronation Avenue is located off Newport Road,
Northwood close to the junction with Nodes Road. The application site is situated on the north side of the Avenue
to the lower half of the road. The site
consists of a two storey detached property with a large domestic garden to the
rear stretching approximately 55 metres in length. The dwelling to the west of the property is a bungalow, while
other properties on the same side of the road are two storey. To the east of the site are two new houses
within an infill plot, the second of these new houses is in close proximity to
its boundary with a bungalow neighbouring the site. Land to the rear of the application site consists of open
countryside.
RELEVANT HISTORY
TCP/25625 - an application was refused in September
2003 for a two storey side and rear extension to form replacement garage and
provision for additional living accommodation.
The reason for refusal was two-fold.
Firstly, the proposed two storey side extension was thought by reason of
its size and proximity to the boundary to have an overbearing effect on the
occupants of the adjoining bungalow as well as appearing cramped in the street
scene. In consequence, this would have
been contrary to policies D1 Standards of Design and H7 Extensions and
Alterations to Existing Properties of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. Secondly, the application was
seen as deficient in detail to demonstrate that the proposed first floor
accommodation would satisfy a short-term need and subsequently capable of being
incorporated into the main house as additional living accommodation. It was seen that the application would be
tantamount to the creation of a separate dwelling which would be
unacceptable. Once again development
would be contrary to policy D1 Standards of Design and H7 Extension and
Alterations to Existing Properties of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan.
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Consent is sought for the demolition of the garage and
conservatory with replacement conservatory and development of a two storey side
extension to form replacement garage with two bedrooms over and a two storey
rear extension to provide additional living accommodation. This is a revised scheme in which the
applicant has sought to overcome the initial reasons for refusal of a previous
application on the site. The extension
has been moved one metre off the side boundary, with the additional living
accommodation incorporated into the main house not forming annexed
accommodation.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
Relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan are
considered to be as follows:
S6 - Development will be expected to be of a high
standard of design
G4 - General Locational Criteria for Development
D1 - Standards of Design
H7 - Extensions and Alterations to Existing Properties
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
None.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL COMMENTS
Not applicable.
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
One letter received objecting on grounds which can be
summarised as follows:
Not significantly
different from original application.
Loss of secondary light
and air to lounge/diner.
Overbearing/overshadowing.
Cramped in street
scene.
Loss of several trees
and hedges on the boundary of application site would provide a more pleasurable
outlook, resulting in featureless solid brick wall.
One letter received supporting the application and
confirming no objection.
CRIME & DISORDER IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder implications are
anticipated.
EVALUATION
Determining factors in considering the application are whether or not the extension has been moved significantly off the side boundary of the site or would still be an intrusive addition having an overbearing impact on the occupants of the adjoining bungalow and adding to a cramped appearance within the street scene.
The proposal follows the refusal of a previous
application for a similar development on the grounds of the proximity of the
two storey extension to the boundary with the neighbouring bungalow and
insufficient information in respect of the additional annex accommodation and
its capability of being incorporated into the main house and not
sub-leased. These issues have been
overcome in this re-submission with detailed floor plans and the omission of a
second kitchen/diner and staircase incorporating the extension into the scheme
and solely providing additional living accommodation and not annexed. The extension has been moved a metre off the
boundary with the neighbouring bungalow in order to reduce any dominance of the
two storey element.
Objections have been raised by the residents of the neighbouring
bungalow in regards to the over-dominance of the extension and over-development
of the site. The extension would be
facing two side windows of the bungalow and the objector has raised concerns
over the loss of natural light to these windows from the extension. However, these are secondary windows with
adequate light provided from the principal window. In respect to the over-development of the site, the garden stretches
a distance of approximately 55 metres and as such the site is seen as an adequate
size for the scale of the development.
Additional concerns were raised over the featureless
solid brick wall, which would as a result of the application face the west
elevation of the neighbouring bungalow.
The design of this elevation is such in order not to create any
overlooking issues to the windows in the side elevation of the bungalow.
The proposed development must be examined in relation
to the street scene and other developments in Coronation Avenue, in order to
determine whether the extension appears cramped within the street scene and
overbearing. The development of two
detached properties was approved in October 2002, this development follows the
relatively close-knit development in the area with the second of the houses
being in very close proximity to the bungalow on the neighbouring plot. This relationship between dwellings is
closer than that of the application site. Reference has been made by third
parties to the significant effect of the new dwellings on light levels within
the adjacent bungalow. In this respect,
it should be noted that the distance between the buildings is approximately 2
metres. In contrast, a greater distance
would be maintained between the applicant’s property and the neighbouring
bungalow. In this respect, a distance
of 1 metre would be maintained between the side wall of the extension and the
boundary of the application site, beyond which is the driveway to the
neighbouring property. Therefore, I
remain of the opinion that refusal of the application on grounds of loss of
light to the neighbouring property would not be sustainable. Furthermore, I am satisfied that the visual
impact of the extension can be softened with further planting along the
boundary, which can be addressed by a condition of the planning
permission. The design of the
extension sits comfortably within the street scene because it sits back from
the front of the property to minimise any potential visual impact.
The removal of the existing conservatory and its
replacement with a larger structure would not have a detrimental impact on the
surrounding properties with sufficient natural growth to boundaries obscuring
any overlooking and the length of the garden being adequate to accommodate the
additional depth.
I am of the opinion that the reasons for refusal of
the original application for this site have been overcome and, as such, the
extension is an acceptable addition to the property.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this recommendation to grant planning
permission consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8
(Right to Privacy) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful
Enjoyment of Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on
the owners/occupiers of the other property in the area and other third parties
have been carefully considered. Whilst
there may be some interference with the rights of these people this has to be
balanced with the rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner
proposed. Insofar as there is an
interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the
protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered
that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Isle of Wight
Unitary Development Plan and in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION
Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all
material considerations referred to in this report, I am satisfied that the
extension has overcome the original reasons for refusal and represents an
acceptable form of development and as such would comply with Policy S6
(Development will be expected to be of a high standard of design), D1
(Standards of Design) and H7 (Extensions and Alterations to Existing
Properties) of the Unitary Development Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
- APPROVAL
Conditions/Reasons:
|
1 |
Time limit - full
- A10 |
|
2 |
Matching materials
- S01 |
|
3 |
Construction of the
buildings hereby permitted shall not commence until a schedule of all
materials and finishes to be used for the external roofing and walls of the
same has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Thereafter only such
approved materials and finishes shall be used in carrying out the development. Reason: To
safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with Policy D1
(Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
|
4 |
Withdrawn PD right for windows/dormers -
R03 |
|
5 |
Prior to work commencing on site, details of landscaping on the boundary alongside the extension, including the species to be planted, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such landscaping shall be carried out prior to the extension hereby approved being brought into use or such other timescale as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and shall be retained and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In
the interests of the amenities of the area in general and the neighbouring
residential property in particular, and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards
of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |