Agenda item

Proposed extensions and alterations to provide ground and first floor accommodation, new hipped roof providing a second-floor loft room and covered balcony, and refurbishment of outbuildings.

The meeting Adjourned 11:22 – 11:36.

 

Cllr Suttle left the room at 11:36.

 

 

The Planning Officer presented the application for extensions and alterations to provide additional ground and first floor accommodation, a new hipped roof incorporating a second-floor loft room and covered balcony, together with the refurbishment of outbuildings. It was noted that an objection had been received from Swanage Town Council.

 

The site was identified on a map and was noted to lie within the Dorset National Landscape but outside the Conservation Area. Members were shown photographs of the property, which comprised a detached dwelling with partial two-storey form. A converted garage was located to the side of the dwelling. It was explained that the property had originated as a backland development and remained relatively unassuming in character, not appearing prominent within the landscape or wider views. It remained subservient to the larger neighbouring property, Craig-y-Don.

 

The proposed development comprised ground and first floor extensions to the south and west elevations, together with the creation of a loft room within a new pitched roof. The proposal also sought to retain the existing outbuilding and demolish the existing garage.

 

It was explained that an earlier application had proposed a substantially larger two-storey extension and an external staircase. That scheme had been withdrawn following officer concerns regarding its scale, massing and potential overlooking impacts on neighbouring properties. Pre-application advice had subsequently been provided, resulting in a significantly reduced scheme. Members were shown the evolution of the roof design together with the existing and proposed site plans. The revised proposal also included the installation of a heat pump and solar panels. It was noted that the site lay within the settlement boundary and that officers had worked closely with the applicant to secure a scheme of reduced size, scale and mass. The revised design retained visual openness to the side of the property.

 

Neighbour objections had focused principally on the height of the proposed hipped roof and the extension of the flat-roofed element. Officers considered that, following amendments to the scheme, neither the hipped roof nor the flat roof extension were overbearing within the street scene. Whilst acknowledging that the roof design was not considered exceptional, officers regarded the proposal as achieving a more cohesive overall appearance.

 

The site was located outside the Conservation Area and would not affect any heritage assets. The proposed materials would match the existing dwelling, and the visual impact of the extensions would remain largely read within the context of the larger Craig-y-Don building. The proposal was therefore considered to conserve and enhance the purposes of the Dorset National Landscape. No objections had been received from the Council’s Tree Officer, biodiversity enhancements would be secured by condition, and no highway objections had been raised.

 

The impact on neighbouring amenity was assessed in detail. Objections had raised concerns regarding loss of privacy, overlooking, overbearing impacts and the proposed decking area to the rear. Plans illustrating separation distances between properties were shown. Existing trees along the site boundaries provided a degree of screening. It was noted that Longhouse was already overlooked by neighbouring properties and that there was an existing degree of mutual overlooking between surrounding dwellings. It was therefore concluded that any additional loss of privacy arising from the proposal would not be substantially worse than the existing situation.

 

The relationship with Peveril Court was also considered, with it noted that views from the proposed second-floor balcony would primarily be directed northwards. Plans were displayed showing the relationship with Craig-y-Don, and officers concluded that the proposal would not result in an unacceptable loss of light. A bathroom window facing eastwards was proposed, and a condition requiring obscure glazing was recommended.

 

Concerns had also been raised by residents of Craig-y-Don regarding the proposed decking. It was explained that an area of raised decking had previously existed on the site but had since been removed. The proposal sought to reinstate decking at a slightly higher level, although it would not be taller than the previous structure. An obscure glazed privacy screen was proposed to prevent direct views into the garden of Craig-y-Don. A condition would require the screen to be installed and retained, which was considered to represent an improvement over the existing situation.

 

It was concluded that the revised, smaller-scale scheme better integrated the different roof forms and represented an acceptable design. It was considered that the impacts on neighbouring amenity had been appropriately addressed and that the proposal was considered acceptable.

 

Public representation was received in objection to the application from, Dr Gavin Rider, on behalf of the residents of Craig-y-Don and Amy Blout. The concerns raised about the application included; the use of the flat roof area as a terrace by future occupants of the dwelling; the lawfulness of the previous decking and the impact of the new decking area and screen, which would sit above the height of the boundary wall to Craig-y-Don; the large dormer window and the overall height and scale of the development.

 

Michele Coral also spoke, as the applicant. She noted that the first application had been withdrawn following concerns from neighbours and the new application had significantly reduced the scale of the proposal. There was also no intention of using the roof area as a terrace and solar panels would be installed on the flat roof area, preventing any recreational use.

 

In response to the public speakers the Planning Officer clarified that the original application was more substantial and had been scaled back following pre-application advice. Conditions recommended in the report prevented additional windows and also prevented use of the flat roof for recreational purposes. An obscure screen was proposed to prevent overlooking from the decking, this was in preference to planting which would be difficult to control through planning conditions.

 

In response to questions from members, officers provided the following responses:

·       The dwelling in its current condition was a two-bedroom property and it would be extended to a three-bedroom property, but outbuildings would be removed

·       The roof height was 8m above finished floor level although land levels varied.

·       Planning permission was required for the decking as it was over 0.3m in height.

·       The loft room would provide access to the covered balcony, but there would not be direct access onto the flat roof.

·       There would be a distance of 23m from the balcony to the nearest neighbouring property.

·       An obscure glazed screen would provide a reliable screen whereas there was insufficient room for planting and it could not be relied upon; it would need to be managed.

 

It was proposed by Cllr Ezzard and seconded by Cllr Coombs that the application be granted.

 

Decision: That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.