Agenda item

To determine the application.

Alison Hoffman presented the report to members.

The committee had regard to its inspection of the site (as agreed in accordance with the Site Inspection: Policy and Procedure (minute P19/04 refers)) during its deliberations.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the Public Participation Procedure, from Shanna Jackson, the agent. Mrs Jackson stated that this proposal is for an extension to the front to form a new attached double garage and first-floor extension above the existing front projection to form an additional bedroom in the form of a master suite and storage. She expressed the opinion that the applicant is committed to a high-quality design and the proposal is as a result of his desire to invest in his family home and provide a high-quality property which meets his family’s needs, which is something that is supported by the National Design Guide.

Mrs Jackson stated that the site is located at the end of a row of houses and provides a natural stop to development along the Barton Road street scene as can be seen on the submitted location plan. She expressed the view that being on the end of a row the dwelling is not in a prominent position amongst the existing development and is in a location which is visually capable of accommodating extensions and alterations.

Mrs Jackson stated that a variety of roof heights is proposed within the development to provide character and visual interest when approaching the site from either direction along Barton Road and it is submitted that variations in roof heights and vertical visual breaks would avoid any undue bulk and massing contrary to the assertions made in the reasons for refusal. She expressed the opinion that it is admirable that the applicant wishes to invest in this property to provide a high-quality living space which meets his family’s needs and the scheme before members has been carefully designed to reflect this.

Mrs Jackson made the point that the site is on the end of a row of houses and, in her view, is capable of accommodating the proposed scale and design of the extensions given that it forms a natural end to the street scene. She hoped members would be able to support the application and grant planning permission.

Members made comments, asked questions and received responses as follows:

·       Councillor Mrs French expressed the view that this is a large house, and the applicant wants to put a large extension on it, with there being only one reason for refusal due to bulk, design and being unduly prominent in the street scene which she feels is a matter of interpretation.

·       Councillor Mrs Mayor referred to a previous application where roof heights were being discussed and this property is going to have various different roof heights, with one of the extensions removing light from an existing window in the property which does not sit comfortably with her.

·       Councillor Benney made the point that the applicant has designed the proposal this way to take the window out of the existing dwelling. He feels that members should be supporting someone wanting to improve their home, he cannot see anything wrong with the application, which is an addition to his already nice home which he is trying to make nicer.

·       Councillor Topgood stated that Wisbech does not just need 1-bed homes, it needs high-quality homes too to bring the money into the town. He feels that this applicant wants to spend money in Wisbech, and he cannot see anything wrong with the application.

·       Councillor Connor agreed with the previous speakers, expressing the view that it is perception on what people want and if the applicant wants to improve the dwelling for his own circumstances, he does not think the committee should go against it.

·       Councillor Mrs Davis made the point that, whilst she applauds people doing well and wanting to expand their house, it needs to be taken into account the people that live around that property and the impact the proposal will have on the neighbours and the street. She feels the proposal is a step too far, it does not fit in and will stand out, with the property already being huge and a new extension will not add to the look of the property.

·       Councillor Mrs French made the point that local residents are all in support of the application according to the officer’s report.

·       Councillor Murphy stated that if members are worried about roof and roof heights, they should look at a property in London Road Chatteris which has many different roof heights, and nobody has complained about this property.

·       Councillor Benney agreed with Councillor Murphy, with this property being approved by officers.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Topgood and agreed that the application be GRANTED against officer’s recommendation, with authority delegated to officers to apply conditions.

Members do not support officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they do not feel the proposal would represent an incongruous and unduly prominent feature in the street scene resulting in significant and demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the area.