Agenda item

Recommendation: Conditional approval.

Proposal: Householder application for the proposed first floor side extension, conversion of existing garage to create habitable accommodation, two storey rear extension following the demolition of existing single storey rear, plus changes to fenestration and internal alterations.

Applicant: Mr M Joshi.

The Committee received and reviewed a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 75 to 100.

The Committee were advised that there were no Members’ updates.

Laura Blumenthal, Ward Member, spoke in objection to the application. Laura stated that there were several issues with the application. Laura queried why a manhole would be concreted over as part of the application. Laura stated that the proposed development was opposite a primary school which was consequently situated on an extremely busy road with cars using on street parking. Laura raised concerns over the tandem parking at the proposed development, stating that it could encourage the residents of the proposed development to park on the already congested road. Laura was of the opinion that should the application be approved, then construction on the main extension should not occur prior to the completion of the driveway as otherwise construction vehicles may be forced to park on-street. Laura asked that in its current state, the application be refused.

Simon Weeks reminded the Committee that they could only consider whether the previous reasons for refusal, parking spaces and setback distance, had been addressed.

Pauline Jorgensen queried whether the proposed development could be split up into three separate apartments in the future. Marcia Head, Development Management Team Leader, stated that a change of use to three apartments would require further planning permission.

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey queried what parking restrictions were present outside of the proposed development site. Judy Kelly, Highways Development Manager, stated that there was an advisory no parking during school hours restriction in place.

Gary Cowan queried why the proposal was recommended for approval considering there was not a separation distance of at least 1m at the site boundary. Adriana Gonzalez stated that although this element of the application was not compliant with the borough design guide, number 22 Campbell road had a single storey rear extension built to its site boundary. Simon Weeks added that the issue of boundary separation distance was not a previous reason for refusal and was therefore considered acceptable in the context of the application.

A number of Members queried the covering up of a manhole on the development site. Simon Weeks clarified that this was not a matter for the Planning Committee to resolve as it was a building control regulation and was therefore outside of the remit of the Planning Committee.

Malcolm Richards queried what extra permission the applicant would need to obtain in order to extend the dropped kerb outside of the proposed development site. Judy Kelly stated that the applicant would need to apply for a S184 licence. Judy added that several other properties in the area had successfully applied for such permission previously.

Simon Weeks proposed that a further condition be added, in order to apply standard hours of construction to this application (8am-6pm Monday to Friday, 8am-1pm Saturday, no construction to take place on Sunday or Bank Holidays) due to the site’s proximity to neighbouring properties. The proposal was moved, seconded and passed, and subsequently added to the list of conditions.

RESOLVED That application 191126 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 76 to 78, and additional standard hours of construction condition as detailed above.