Application Number: 17/P3581         Ward: Village

Officer Recommendation: GRANT Planning Permission subject to conditions

Proposal: Erection of a single storey extension to east and south west elevations, a two storey extension to west elevation, excavation of basement and reconfiguration of second floor and erection of dormer windows, including amalgamation of the coach house at 24A The Grange with 24 The Grange

The Committee noted the officers report and presentation. The Committee received verbal representations from two objectors to the application, the Applicant’s agent and the Ward Councillor.

The Objectors made points including:

·         The application property and its surrounding Edwardian properties are all locally listed

·         This application does not respect the space between the buildings

·         The proposed frontage will not improve the steetscene

·         The temporary fencing installed by the new owner impacts on rear of neighbours house

·         The application will cause visual intrusion and will block light.

·         The house is already large. The above ground extension would cause a loss of privacy to neighbours.

·         The basement is enormous and would present a flood risk

·         Seven mature trees have already been removed. Removal of trees should be part of the planning application

The Applicant’s agent made comments including:

·         Property sits on large site

·         Current building has a negative impact on the Conservation Area

·         The Basement application has been amended and is 4m away from neighbours, there is a Basement Impact Assessment

·         The Coach house is ancillary to the main property

·         There will be no loss of trees, the frontage will be landscaped and additional trees planted

·         The Council’s Conservation Officer had no objections to the proposal

The Ward Councillor, Hamish Badenoch made comments including:

·         Do not underestimate the scale, bulk massing and loss of space of the proposal. It will cause visual intrusion  and affect the rhythm of the steetscene

·         It is not an appropriate design in the Conservation Area

·         It will cause a loss of neighbour amenity

·         The proposed façade is one continuous block, but the Coach House should be kept separate

The Planning Team Leader replied to the Objectors Comments:

·         Officers are recommending this application for approval because the extension is single storey and the spaciousness is respected. The linkage of the Coach House to the main house is sympathetic and the impact on the Conservation Area is not harmful

·         There is a Basement Impact Assessment, and the Council’s Flood Risk Engineer has no objections.

·         On the plan the building height is the same as existing

·         Regrettable that the trees have been removed, but the proposal will add new trees

In reply to Members Questions the Planning Team Leader said:

·         The proposed basement follows the footprint of the existing house and the proposed extension.

·         The existing chimney is to be retained at the same height, any increase in height  would be an enforcement issue.

Members made comments including:

·         It is a big house and fills the plot. Spaces are a large part of the Conservation Area

·         The proposed Roof is enormous, with a lot of accommodation in it.

·         The whole proposed frontage will dominate, the bulk is inappropriate

·         The link between the Coach house and Main house is a mistake

·         The Coach House is worth preserving, there is nothing to mitigate for it’s loss

·         In a Conservation Area, Members can impose stricter judgement

The Planning And Development Manager reminded Members that the Council’s Conservation Officer did not object to the proposal.

A motion to refuse on the grounds of Bulk, Massing and being detrimental to the character of the Conservation Area was proposed and seconded and put to the vote.

RESOLVED

The Committee agreed to:

1.    REFUSE the application for the following reasons:

·         The  bulk and massing,  of the proposal are too great, contrary to LBM policies.

·         The proposal would be detrimental to the character of its setting in the Conservation Area

2.    DELEGATE to the Director of Environment & Regeneration the authority to make any appropriate amendments in the context of the above to the wording of the grounds of refusal including references to appropriate policies