Issue - meetings

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Proposal: Householder application for the proposed erection of a balcony to the rear of the property.

Applicant: Mr Graham Ebers

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 17 to 30.

The Committee were advised that there were no updates within the Supplementary Planning Agenda.

John Gallagher, neighbour, spoke in objection to the application. John felt that the photo used within the presentation was misleading as the picture was taken with an arm outside of the window rather than from the window. John added that the proposed balcony would create an overlooking issue into his dining room which was not the case at the moment. John had requested that an officer visit his home to look at the issue from his property, however this had not occurred and he felt that officers did not understand the full extent of the issue. John stated that an amendment to the plans to include a 1.8m obscure glass wall showed that officers had also felt that the application would create an overlooking issue. John added that the wall would drop to 1.2m high, which was waist height and therefore would not prevent overlooking. John asked that either the application be deferred until such time that an officer visit his property, or the entire width of the balcony include a 1.8m high obscure glass wall.

Stephen Conway commented that the case officer had stated his judgement that the obscure glazed panel would stop the overlooking issue. Tariq Bailey-Biggs stated that by virtue of the screening the applicant would not be able to see into the neighbour’s garden without walking to the corner of the balcony and deliberately looking over. Tariq added that the rear neighbouring garden could currently be seen from the applicant’s window.

Chris Bowring queried whether overlooking could occur from the balcony with normal expected use. Tariq Bailey-Biggs confirmed that the applicant would have to look over the balcony in order to see the neighbouring garden.

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey commented that the balcony could be extended to 1.8m height across the width of the balcony to increase privacy for the neighbouring dwelling.

John Gallagher commented that the overlooking issue was that his dining room could be overlooked by virtue of the proposed balcony, which was not an issue currently.

Pauline Jorgensen queried whether the lower portion of the neighbouring dining room could be seen from the proposed balcony. Tariq Bailey-Biggs commented that only the higher portion of the neighbouring dining room could be seen unless the applicant went to the far corner of the balcony.

Stephen Conway was of the opinion that overlooking of the neighbouring dining room would be difficult unless a conscious effort to do so was made by the applicant. Stephen added that the 1.8m obscure glazed side panels would address this problem as best it could.

RESOLVED That application number 212780 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 18 and 19.