Agenda item - BH2017/03830, 19 Shirley Drive, Hove- Householder Planning Consent

Erection of first floor side extension over existing garage and a porch to the front elevation and a porch to the side elevation.

RECOMMENDATION – WOULD HAVE GRANTED

Ward Affected: Hove Park

              Erection of first floor side extension over existing garage and a porch to the front elevation and a porch to the side elevation.

              Officer Presentation

(1)          The Principal Planning Officer, Jonathan Puplett, introduced the application and gave a presentation by reference to plans, site plans, elevational drawings and photographs. He explained that as an appeal against non-determination had been lodged the Committee were unable to determine the application but were required to indicate what their decision would have been had the Council determined the application prior to the appeal being lodged. This would then be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate in conjunction with the planning authority appeal statement.

(2)          It was explained that the main considerations in determining this application related to the impact of the proposed development on the relationship between the proposed works and the neighbouring property, the resultant impact on the amenity of neighbours and the design and appearance of the proposed extension. The proposed development followed a previous application which had been refused and a subsequent appeal which had been dismissed. Consideration of the current application had taken account of the inspector’s reasons for dismissing that appeal. It was considered that the proposed development would result in an acceptable appearance and the impact upon neighbouring amenity which would be caused was considered insufficient to warrant refusal. Approval would therefore have been recommended.

              Public Speakers

(4)          Mr Adams the immediate neighbour to 19 Shirley Drive, spoke in objection to the application. He stated that the proposed extension would cause a loss of light to his house and specifically his front room which would be cast into shadow. He was not against the principle of 19 Shirley Drive being extended but as his living room window was set back 4m from the garage a two storey extension would block all light to the room which suffered from poor light already.

              Questions for Officers

(5)          In response to Councillor Theobald, the Planning Officer stated that no daylight report was available and it had been the opinion of the Planning Inspector that a larger proposed extension would not have had a significant impact on light to the neighbouring property.

(6)          In response to Councillor Hyde, the Planning Officer confirmed that it was not proposed to have a window on the side of the extension.

(7)          In response to Councillor Hyde, the Legal Adviser confirmed that once an appeal had been lodged the Planning Inspector would determine an application regardless of the Committee’s decision. The Applicant could however choose to withdraw the appeal and submit a new application.

(8)          In response to Councillor Gilbey, the Planning Officer confirmed that the application included the installation of a new porch.

(9)          In response to Councillor Theobald, the Planning Officer stated that the revised design was about 50cm smaller than the previous application which meant that the first floor no longer extended beyond the existing footprint of the garage.

              Debate and Decision Making Process

(10)       A vote was taken and on a vote of 9 For to 3 Against with no abstentions members determined that had they determined the application prior to an appeal being lodged against non-determination the Committee would have granted planning permission.

18.12    RESOLVED – That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in the report and resolves that, had the Council determined the application prior to an appeal against non-determination being lodged, it WOULD HAVE GRANTED planning permission subject to Conditions and Informatives set out in the report.