Demolition of garage and erection of part single storey, part two storey side extension.  Loft conversion, involving raising the roof height of the property, with skylights at the front and dormer windows at the rear. Replace existing porch with larger porch.

The application sought permission for demolition of garage and erection of part single storey, part two storey side extension.  A loft conversion, involving raising the roof height of the property, with skylights at the front and dormer windows at the rear and replacement of the existing porch with a larger one.  The application had been referred to Committee at the request of Councillor Raikes on the grounds that the extensions would lead to a loss of amenity to neighbouring properties and concerns over the bulk of the proposal.

Members’ attention was brought to the late observations sheet which proposed to delete  Condition 7. 

The Committee was addressed by the following speakers:

Against the Application:       Geoffrey Ockenden

For the Application:              Sean Edwards

Parish Representative:         Cllr. Raikes

Local Member:                      Cllr. Fleming

Members asked questions of clarification from the Speakers and Officers.  The health of the current screening  of Leylandii was raised as a possible issue. Officers advised that maintenance and height could not be conditioned as the Leylandii were in a neighbours garden.  Officers further advised that the suggested soft landscaping scheme could be bolstered.  Officers clarified that the question of overlooking had not been a ground of refusal previously.  However the Planning Inspector was likely to have considered overlooking in assessing the appeal, but did not cite this in his decision letter. 

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

It was acknowledged that the application was an improvement but some Members were still concerned by the impact of, the size and the need for the dormer windows to the rear which gave the impression of an additional floor, were overlooking the neighbouring properties and would impact on street scene.  They were also concerned by the detailing of the soft landscaping and maintenance of future screening.  The proposed development was considered to be an unneighbourly proposal despite being of reduced scale.  There was still the fundamental issue of impact on the street scene as with the previous application.  Members debated the possibility of adding more obscured glazing to the rear to mitigate impact and overlooking of neighbours by the rear dormers.

It was moved by the Chairman and duly seconded, that the first line of Condition 8 be amended to read ‘and in agreement with the local Members,’ and that the dormer windows for the landing be obscured glaze.

The motion including the above amendment was put to the vote and was lost.

It was moved by the Chairman and duly seconded that the application be refused on the same grounds as previously and that as  the loft and roof space extension would  extend above the existing ridge  giving the appearance of another floor this would not comply with policy H6B and would be in contravention of NPPF  paragraph 66.

The motion was put to the vote and it was

Resolved:  That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons

1)        the proposed extension would appear cramped on this relatively restricted plot.  The extended dwelling would form an incongruous feature that would erode the spaciousness of the street scene to the detriment of the character of the area contrary to Sevenoaks District Core Strategy Policy SP1, Sevenoaks District Local Plan Policy EN1, the Sevenoaks Residential Extension Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework;

2)        due to the increase in built form and height as a result of the proposal along the boundary between the two properties (the site and No.49 Mount Harry Road) the proposal is unacceptable as the development would have an overbearing and unneighbourly impact on the private amenity space of the neighbouring property (No.49) and is therefore contrary to Policies EN1 and H6B of the Sevenoaks District Local Plan,  the Sevenoaks Residential Extension Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework; and

3)        the proposed increase in the height of the roof and insertion of dormers on the rear elevation will result in loss of privacy to Hawthornes and an unneighbourly form of development.  As such the proposal is contrary to policies EN1 & H6B of the Sevenoaks Local Plan, SP1 of the Sevenoaks Core Strategy, the Sevenoaks Residential Extension Supplementary Planning Document and the National Planning Policy Framework.