Agenda item - BH2013/00491 - Westview, Cornwall Gardens, Brighton - Householder Planning

Extensions and alterations to existing chalet bungalow to form a two storey house.

RECOMMENDATION – REFUSE

Extensions and alterations to existing chalet bungalow to form a two storey house.

(1)                   The Area Planning Manager introduced the report, and gave a presentation by reference to plans, photographs and elevational drawings. The application proposed a two-storey extension that would raise the roof of the bungalow and also extend into the side retaining the existing garage. This would create a two-storey building with two fully glazed gables at the front; which would be a very prominent feature. Officers were not concerned with the proposed bulk, but felt the design fell down in relation to some of the detailing. The building also proposed a slate roof and a large roof light at the front both of which were considered inappropriate, and some of the materials and characteristics were felt to be out of keeping with the area and potentially visually harmful. It was important that development within the conservation area was appropriate, and would not cause harm; for the reasons set out in the report the application was recommended for refusal.

Public Speakers and Questions

(2)                   Mr Anderson spoke in support of the application in his capacity as the owner and applicant. He explained he worked from home, and his children went to school locally, and the application was to make their 1950’s bungalow more sustainable and efficient. He explained that pre-application advice had been given that there was no objection to raising the roof to create a second storey. After the first application was refused the second had sought to address the reasons for refusal; then they were informed that the second application was likely to be recommended for refusal in relation to the proposed materials. They had also not been made aware of any objection to the fully glazed gabled windows, and they were happy to amend this; as well using materials that would be appropriate. Mr Anderson explained he had letters of support from his neighbours, and felt the extension would be an improvement to the existing building.

(3)                   Councillor Wealls asked about the choice of materials, and Mr Anderson explained that they had considered a number of different options, and they had tried to pick those they considered to be in keeping; they were more than happy to negotiate the materials, but had not until now received any feedback on this.

Questions for Officers

(4)                   Councillor Mac Cafferty asked about some of the contradictory advice that the applicant had made reference to, and in response the Deputy Development Control Manager highlighted the Conservation Officers comments in the report, and stated these were clear.

(5)                   Following a query from Councillor Hyde it was explained by Officers that they would normally expect the objection to the fully glazed gable windows to have been raised, and it was felt that in this case it should have been picked up.

(6)                   In response to a query from Councillor Davey the Area Planning Manager explained that Officers would be happy to work with the applicant, if the Committee were minded to refuse, to look at a scheme that could be suitable for delegated approval.

(7)                   Councillor Mac Cafferty stated his concern with the lack of information and clarity in relation to application process; he suggested the application be deferred to allow further discussion between the applicant and Officers. This position was echoed by Councillor Hamilton.

6.10       RESOLVED – That the application be deferred to allow further discussion on design and external materials between the applicant and Officers.