Demolition of conservatory and detached single garage, erection of a single storey rear extension and two storey side extension.

The proposal sought permission for demolition of conservatory and detached single garage, erection of a single storey rear extension and two storey side extension.  It was a resubmission of a scheme previously refused at committee contrary to the officer’s recommendation (planning reference SE/13/13/00628/HOUSE refers). The application had been taken to appeal and withdrawn.  The proposal was the same as the previously refused scheme and had been considered against Section 70A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to establish if there were grounds to refuse to accept the application.  It had been found that the Local Authority could not decline to entertain the application in this instance, as the local authority had to have also refused more than one similar application within a two year period.  The officer assessment and recommendation was also the same as previously except that it responded to new points raised in the consultation replies.  The application was called to Committee by Councillor McGarvey due to the concerns that the proposal may result in an overdevelopment of the cramped site, and that the proposal may affect the amenities of existing neighbours and future occupants of the site and on the grounds of highway safety.

Members’ attention was brought to the late observations sheet which commented on a further representation received, and did not propose any amendments or changes to the recommendations before the Committee.

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       Mr B Roberts

For the Application:              -

Parish Representative:         -

Local Member:                      -           

Members asked questions of clarification from the Speakers and Officers.  A Member asked whether there was a condition for soft landscaping, the Case Officer response that there was not but it could be added.

At 10.27 p.m. it was moved by Cllr. Miss. Thornton and duly seconded that, in accordance with rule 16.1 of Part 2 of the Constitution, Members extend the meeting beyond 10.30 p.m. to enable the Committee to complete the business on the agenda. The motion was put to the vote and it was

Resolved: That the meeting be extended past 10.30 p.m. to enable the Committee to complete the business on the agenda.

It was moved by the Chairman and duly seconded that the recommendations in the report to grant permission subject to conditions, be agreed. 

Members were disappointed that this had come before Committee again and felt that the previous reasons for refusal still stood as stated in the report including conflict with policy LO8 of the Core Strategy.

The motion was put to the the vote and lost.

The Chairman moved, and it was duly seconded that the application be refused for the previous reasons listed at paragraph 22 of the report and including LO8 of the Core Strategy.  The motion was put to the vote and it was

Resolved:  By virtue of its size, bulk and position the proposal would result in a cramped form of development within the site which would be detrimental to the character of the street scene and would fail to preserve or enhance the Conservation Area.  This is contrary to policies EN1 and EN23 of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework and Core Strategy Policy LO8.