The Committee considered an application for a
two storey rear extension and single storey side extension at 110
Reason Why Being
Considered by Planning Committee
The application had been referred to Planning
Committee in accordance with the adopted Scheme of Delegation.
The application had been the subject of a site
The report set out the background to the
proposal, the site and surrounding area, the proposal itself,
relevant policies, planning history and representations and
consultations where applicable.
The Committee’s attention was drawn to
the late papers which related to comments from neighbouring
residents in relation to:
extension of neighbour consultation period;
45 and 25 degree code tests.
An Officer response was provided for each of
the issues raised.
The information was presented as set out by
the Deputy Director – Economic Development and Planning.
The following person had registered to speak
on the application:
Andrew McGhee (Objector)
Key Points of
- The objector informed
the Committee that the proposal would create a shadow across his
property and all he would see is a red brick wall. He was also concerned as to where the cycle store
was to be placed which originally was to be located on the
forecourt. The objector also stated
that he had no objection in principle to the extension but how it
was to be built.
- Some Members raised
concerns over the construction at the rear of the property as there
was no side access and what impact this would have on neighbouring
properties. On the basis of this it was
asked if a condition for a construction management plan could be
added which would also include the phasing of access and
construction (construction project plan). The Development Management Services Team Leader
agreed to also include construction and delivery hours.
- In response to a
query on the provision of cycle storage the Development Management
Services Team Leader stated that as the cycle storage had been
omitted from the scheme a condition for the provision of a more
suitable cycle storage had been recommended as the original
submission was not considered acceptable. Condition 4 refers.
- Reference was made to
the 45 and 25 degree code tests and the minor breaches. The Development Management Services Team Leader
informed Members that in order to assess the impact of the proposal
on neighbouring residents, the 45 and 25 degree code tests as set
out in the South Worcestershire Design Supplementary Planning
Document are used. Paragraphs 7.7-7.9
of the report referred.
- Some Members agreed
that by granting planning permission and the recommended
conditions, the proposal could be monitored and controlled by
building regulations. Other Members
felt that the proposal was inappropriate and overdevelopment.
On being proposed and seconded and put to the
vote the proposal was agreed with the additional conditions
relating to the construction management plan and a construction
RESOLVED: That the
Committee grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set
out in paragraph 9 of the report, and additional conditions related
to a Construction Environmental Management Plan and a construction
project plan (phasing/means of access and construction).