Agenda item

[NOTE: The Committee was advised of an additional Condition as set out below;

The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until a construction methodology statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA which shall demonstrate how the development shall be constructed so as to minimise disturbance to neighbouring properties.

Reason: In the interest of protecting general amenity in accordance with Policy CS21 of the Woking Core Strategy 2012.]

The Committee considered an application which sought permission to erect a two storey front extension, a first floor replacement side addition, extension of the existing ground floor side element and installation of pitched roof over with internal layout alterations.

The application was deferred at the Planning Committee Meeting on the 14 November 2017 to seek clarification in relation to the position of the northern boundary between the application property and Foxley House. Following this deferral the Council commissioned an independent chartered building surveyor to gather any evidence that was deemed appropriate to establish the most plausible position of the boundary. The conclusions were summarised in the application report. It was noted that as the proposed development fell within the red line as outlined on the plans, any dispute over its accuracy would be a civil issue and would not be regarded as a material planning consideration for the purposes of the application. If approved, Informative 6 stated that Planning permission did not convey the right to enter onto or build on land that was not within the applicant’s ownership.

Councillor A Azad proposed and it was duly seconded that the application be refused on the grounds that the proposed development would, by further concentrating the massing of the built form towards the north-eastern corner of the plot, fail to preserve the character of the Hook Heath area contrary to Policy BE1 of the Hook Heath Neighbourhood Plan.

Discussion ensued on the proposal to refuse the application. 

Following a point of order it was clarified by the Head of Democratic and Legal Services that although the item was deferred on 14 November 2017 to allow for an independent boundary survey to be commissioned, on this occasion it did not prohibit the Committee from discussing the advantages and disadvantages of the application further.

The Development Manager advised Members that the motion for refusal may be difficult to defend at Appeal as the Planning Officers view was that this was a modest extension that would cause little harm to the neighbouring property or surrounding area.

Some Councillors thought that the proposal would actually enhance the current property and as demonstrated in the presentation slides the recessed nature of the window in the proposed extension meant that the views from the extension into the neighbouring property would be more restricted than those already obtainable from the existing first floor bedroom window.

In accordance with Standing Order 10.8, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on the motion above.  The votes for and against refusal of the application were recorded as follows.

In favour:                           Cllrs A Azad, A J Boote, D Harlow, C Rana and Cllr M A Whitehand.

                                 TOTAL:  5

Against:                              Cllrs I Eastwood and L M N Morales

                                 TOTAL:  2

Present but not voting:      Cllrs G G Chrystie (Chairman)

                                 TOTAL:  1

The application was therefore refused.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be refused for the reasons detailed in these minutes.