Agenda item

[NOTE: The Planning Officer advised the Committee that the rear elevation on slide 30 was drawn incorrectly and that the single storey rear element should be on the right hand side rather than the left as shown.]

The Committee considered an application for the subdivision of the existing three bedroom dwelling into two self-contained two-bedroom flats. This would be facilitated by the erection of a part two storey, part single storey rear extension and re-positioning of the front door.

The application was recommended for refusal with the reasons for this detailed on page 48 of the report.

Councillor T Aziz, Ward Councillor, spoke in favour of the application and did not agree with all reasons for refusal and suggested that some amendments would make the application acceptable. Councillor T Aziz proposed and it was duly seconded that the application be approved. It was agreed that discussion on the application would continue before a decision was made on this motion.

Some Members thought that this application was in an area where it was beneficial for habitable dwellings to be created and that as an already heavily developed terrace it did not evidence an unacceptable loss of light or overbearing impact. Other Members thought that it would result in a loss of light to the ground floor of the neighbouring property due to the positioning of the rear extension.

Regarding the absence of windows serving the bedroom, the Planning Officer commented that although the roof lights provided light, the quality of accommodation was affected as the lack of outlook meant that the room was not considered to be good enough standard for use as a bedroom.

Following a query it was noted that although the parking on Kilrush Terrace and surrounding roads was relatively constrained, the minimum parking standard for the proposed flats would be the same as the existing dwelling. It was therefore not considered to have an unacceptable impact on parking.

In response to a Member’s query regarding Prior Approval, the Planning Officer explained that the applicant had obtained Prior Approval under the Prior Notification scheme for larger home extensions for a six metre single storey extension, although this had not been built and only related to domestic extensions to a single dwelling. This was not considered a sufficient fall back as any extensions erected in association with a proposed subdivision into separate dwellings would require neighbour consultation and planning permission in their own right.

It was noted that should the application be approved by the Committee a list of conditions and informatives would need to be drafted for Development Manager to review.

In accordance with Standing Order 22.2, the Chairman deemed that a division should be taken on the motion above.  The votes for and against approval of the application were recorded as follows.

In favour:                           Cllrs S Ashall, T Aziz, A Boote, G Chrystie and I Eastwood.

                                 TOTAL:  5

Against:                              None

                                 TOTAL:  0

Present but not voting:      Cllrs L M N Morales and G Cundy (Chairman)

                                 TOTAL:  2

The application was therefore approved.

RESOLVED

That the planning application be approved subject to the additional conditions and informatives to be set out by the Local Planning Authority.