Issue - meetings

Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) attached to planning permission P/1221/21 dated 18/18/2021 to amend the roof design to include hip-to-gable extensions and a rear dormer above the main dwelling, and gable roof over two-storey side extension (Retrospective) The Planning Committee is asked to consider the following recommendation:

Members wanted clarification on the potential fallback position regarding permitted development.  This was explained by the officer - the roof extension is on a detached dwelling, and this needs to be less than 50 cubic metres.  There are other conditions of permitted development. Officer confirmed that the roof extension does not meet that requirement.  Members wanted to make sure that legal advice had been taken and was advised by the Legal Officer and Chief Officer that this had been done and when assessing the application against the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO), there are limitations, strict limitations to be able to comply with it.  This doesn't comply.

The Committee voted and resolved to accept officer recommendations.

RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse the application for the following reason:

The proposed hip to gables and rear dormer extensions above the original dwelling in conjunction with gable over the two-storey side extension and flat roof over the two storey rear extension, by reason of inappropriate design, excessive bulk, scale and massing would result in incongruous, discordant and ungainly cumulative additions to the dwelling and the rear dormer by reason of its excessive size and lack of visual containment would give rise to a bulky and dominant addition within the rear roof slope.  On this basis, the proposed development would cause detrimental harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the local area, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), Policy D3.D(1) and D3.D(11) of The London Plan (2021), policy CS1.B of the Core Strategy (2012), policy DM1 of the Development Management Policies (2013), and the adopted Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guide (2010).

DECISION:  REFUSE

The Committee wished it to be recorded that the decision to refuse the application was unanimous.