Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
95 19/0183/FUL - 3 Saxon Street PDF 125 KB
Minutes:
The Committee received an application for
full planning permission.
The application sought approval for a single storey rear extension and
rear roof extension.
The Planning Officer referred to amendments contained in the Amendment
Sheet.
The Committee received a representation
in objection to the application from a relative on behalf of a local resident:
i.
The application would cause a huge
loss of light to the resident in terms of where she slept and lived in the
property.
ii.
There was a 2 metre wall on one
side of the resident’ property which already obstructed light. The extension
would cause further enclosure.
iii.
When the resident bought their
house, they did not think that the neighbouring property would be extended any
further than it already was.
iv.
The length of the garden was 7
metres and the extension to the neighbour’s property would reach half of that
and would be overbearing to the resident.
v.
The application would cause
overshadowing.
vi.
14 letters of objection had been
sent into the Planning Department.
vii.
The resident’s amenity would be
severely affected by the planning application and the application was contrary
to Local Plan Policy 58.
Dr Stainsby (Applicant) addressed the Committee in support of the
application.
Councillor
Robertson (Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application:
i.
Drew members attention to the conservation
Officer’s comments which stated that the application did not enhance the area.
ii.
The row of cottages was a small set which had
already been extended by 2.5 metres, this application sought to extend the
property by a further 3 metres.
iii.
The application was contrary to Local Plan Policy
58.
iv.
Referred to the site plan and commented that this
would create a sense of enclosure for 2 Saxon Street.
v.
The loss of light was the most important issue. The
amount of light available to the ground floor of 2 Saxon Street was limited.
vi.
Commented that the light expert report did not make
a lot of sense. The report stated that the vertical sky component test was
likely to fail, this was mentioned in the report but then it said that this did
not matter. The rights of the resident
next door should not be ignored.
vii.
Questioned the amount of sunlight which would be
available in the winter if the application was approved.
viii.
In summary the application would create an enormous
sense of enclosure and loss of light to the neighbouring resident.
Resolved (by 3 votes to 1 with 1
abstention) to reject the Officer recommendation to approve the
application.
The following reasons for refusal of
the application were put to the Committee and voted on separately:
i.
Insufficient information has been submitted by the
applicant to demonstrate that the development would not result in an
unacceptable loss of light to the rear windows and gardens of the adjacent
properties at Nos. 2 and 4 Saxon Street. Consequently, the development would be
contrary to policies 55, 56 and 58 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.
The
Committee supported this reason for refusal unanimously.
ii.
By virtue of the bulk and mass of the rear
extension, its siting directly adjacent to both side boundaries and the
presence of existing high walls and buildings in the vicinity, the development
would result in an unacceptable degree of enclosure to the rear garden and
windows of the adjacent properties at Nos. 2 and 4 Saxon Street. In doing so,
the development would harm the amenities of the occupiers of those adjacent
properties contrary to policies 55, 56 and 58 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.
The Committee supported this reason for
refusal by 4 votes to 0 with 1 abstention.
iii.
The proposed extension, together with previous
additions to the property, would result in insufficient retained garden space
for the property. Consequently, the development would give rise to a poor level
of amenity for its occupiers, contrary to policies 55, 56 and 58 of the
Cambridge Local Plan 2018.
The Committee supported this reason for
refusal by 3 votes to 1 with 1 abstention.
The Committee:
Resolved (by 3 votes to 1 with 1 abstention) to refuse the application contrary to the Officer
recommendation for the following reasons:
i.
Insufficient information has been submitted by the
applicant to demonstrate that the development would not result in an
unacceptable loss of light to the rear windows and gardens of the adjacent
properties at Nos. 2 and 4 Saxon Street. Consequently, the development would be
contrary to policies 55, 56 and 58 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.
ii.
By virtue of the bulk and mass of the rear
extension, its siting directly adjacent to both side boundaries and the
presence of existing high walls and buildings in the vicinity, the development
would result in an unacceptable degree of enclosure to the rear garden and
windows of the adjacent properties at Nos. 2 and 4 Saxon Street. In doing so,
the development would harm the amenities of the occupiers of those adjacent
properties contrary to policies 55, 56 and 58 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2018.
iii.
The proposed extension, together with previous
additions to the property, would result in insufficient retained garden space
for the property. Consequently, the development would give rise to a poor level
of amenity for its occupiers, contrary to policies 55, 56 and 58 of the
Cambridge Local Plan 2018.