Issue - meetings

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Proposal: Application to vary condition 2 of application 212989 for the proposed erection of a single storey rear extension with 1 no. roof light following demolition of existing conservatory and existing rear extension (part retrospective). Condition 2 refers to the approved plans and the variation is to allow an increase in the height of the roof. (Retrospective).

Applicant: Mr Harguns

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 135 to 152.

The Committee were advised that updates contained within the Supplementary Planning Agenda included:

·         Clarification that Councillor Sam Akhtar listed the item due to the potential impact on neighbours due to loss of privacy;

·         Updated condition 5.

Danny Murphy, neighbour, spoke in objection to the application. Danny stated that the ward member for Charvil, Sam Akhtar, had previously addressed the Committee to advise that he had made comments on the application and had acted as a mediator between the local residents and the owner. Danny added that Sam had in fact not commented on the original retrospective application, nor did he comment on this application, and not even to have it listed. Danny commented that Sam had not acted as a mediator between the applicant and any residents, and the Supplementary Planning Agenda had noted the reason for listing as the application having a potential impact on the neighbours due to loss of privacy. Danny queried whether this was the only point that the Committee could base their decision on, or whether other issues that residents raised concerns about could be considered. Danny stated that he objected to the application based on persistent breaches and breaching on and over his boundary, resulting in the cumulative loss of light and amenity. Danny stated that whilst he was happy that so many members managed to attend the site visit, he was disappointed that residents were not allowed to engage in discussions, and members subsequently had to rely solely on the word of the planning officer, who Danny noted had knowingly accepted inaccurate drawings and had used them in decision making for the previous retrospective planning application. Danny added that the planning officer had used an image at the last Committee meeting from a Google Street view to prove that the extension could not be seen from the street, despite this image being from July 2019 and showing no recent extensions. Danny referenced a recent photograph which showed the recent extension from the street and the obtrusive angles which were also visible from the street. Danny stated that a photo was shown at the previous Committee meeting which was taken in November 2021, prior to the retrospective application being decided whilst being in contrast to the up to date photograph. Danny stated that the plans had since changed again, however no attempt had been made to correct the inaccurate details that had hidden the changes on the western boundary. Danny felt that these issues were indicative of his experience in dealing with the Council over the past 11  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9