Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
44 20/01568/HFUL - 23 North Street PDF 118 KB
Minutes:
The Committee received an application for
full planning permission.
The application sought approval for a first-floor roof extension and
associated works, to create an additional 2no. bedrooms and an en-suite.
The Committee received representation in objection to the application
from a resident of North Street:
i.
Was speaking on behalf of several objectors.
ii.
The application would have an adverse effect on the
direct neighbours who lived next door to the properties.
iii.
The planning officer’s presentation omitted 6 and 8
Canterbury Street which would also be affected by the proposed extension.
iv.
23 North Street was one of three houses (including
21 and 25 North Street) designed together to form a terrace built in the garden
of 59 Histon Road; the original design with subterranean bedrooms and gardens
ensured no overlooking into neighbouring properties; the importance of no
overlooking had been highlighted in the original planning application.
v.
Building a third story would significantly affect
59 Histon Road; the extension would mean that privacy of the house and garden
would be compromised.
vi.
In
addition, no’s 2, 4, 6 and 8 Canterbury Street [which backed on to North
Street] would be overlooked with a large widow [bedroom picture window] at the
front of the extension, so occupiers’ privacy would be reduced for these
properties.
vii.
A bedroom picture window was better suited to a
property that overlooked landscapes not a tight residential urban area.
viii.
No. 11 North Street provided the model for the
church gable end picture window; the objector of this application (20 Benson
Street) noted they could see direct in the bedroom of 11 North Street and this
would be the same for no’s 24& 26 Benson Street.
ix.
Reiterated a picture window was completely
unsuitable for a house on North Street which can be viewed into by neighbours.
x.
If the application were permitted this would change
the look of the terrace and set a precedent which could result in further
overlooking and loss of privacy for surrounding properties.
xi.
Future extensions could lead to a confusion of
different designs.
xii.
Stated that City Councillor Todd-Jones had
indicated the goal posts of planning objections had shifted regarding new built
properties on North Street; overlooking into neighbouring properties was
irrelevant.
xiii.
However, it should be highlighted these new build properties
did not have the same impact on neighbouring properties as these faced garages
and hedges or end of terraced walls. Therefore, this point was relevant.
Mr Bailey (Applicant)
addressed the Committee in support of the application.
Mr Robinson (Applicant’s Agent) addressed the Committee
in support of the application.
City Councillor
Payne (Castle Ward Councillor) addressed the Committee about the application:
i.
The objection to the application was two-fold.
ii.
Firstly, in terms of aesthetics, this property sat
in a group of three, an additional storey on only one building would look
strange and be out of character with the area.
iii.
North
Street sat within a Conservation Area, and the conservation report had noted
this would be out of character with the area.
iv.
The application would also lead to neighbouring
properties being overlooked and would feel crowded on the narrow streets.
v.
Secondly, if this application were approved, it
would then set a clear precedent for the neighbouring houses to do the same. This would substantially change the character
of the area and lead to other houses being overlooked.
The Committee:
Resolved (unanimously) to reject the officer recommendation of refusal to
the application.
Resolved
(unanimously) to approve
the application contrary to the officer recommendation for the following
reasons:
i.
Positive
addition of a high-quality application to the street scene which enhances and
improves the Conservation Area.
Resolved
(unanimously) to delegate
to planning officers to include the
standard conditions for the approval of the application in terms of standard
time for commencement; development in accordance with approved plans;
materials; the removal of permitted development rights under Class B of the TCP
(GPD)O 2015; and the rear bedroom windows to be of obscure glazing in
perpetuity.
35 20/01568/HFUL - 23 North Street PDF 118 KB
Minutes:
Item adjourned
until 10 September committee.