Agenda item

Erection of a part single storey, part two storey side extension.

Erection of a part single storey, part two storey side extension.

The Committee noted:

• The supplementary report of the Head of Planning tabled at the meeting.
• The comments of Winkfield Parish Council.
• Objections had been received from the residents of 2 neighbouring properties on the grounds that the proposed extension would result in adverse overlooking, overbearing and loss of light impacts on the residential amenity of their properties.  Furthermore, the amended plans submitted do not provide a more sympathetic impact of the proposal on the character of the surrounding area.

This application was first considered at the meeting of the Committee on 1 April 2015 but had been deferred on the grounds of requiring an amended parking plan.  The amended plan had since been received and was displayed for the Committee.

A motion to APPROVE the recommendations of the Head of Planning as set out in the report and on the supplementary report was moved and seconded.  On being put to the vote the motion was LOST.

Concerns were raised that the proposed extension by reason of its size, mass and position would result in inappropriate development in this location, detrimental to the character and visual amenity of the area and as such would be contrary to ‘saved ‘policy EN20 of BFBLP and CS7 of CSDPD.

Furthermore the proposal would result in the increase in bedrooms from 3 to 4 therefore requiring the provision of 3 parking spaces. The amended parking layout plan showed an additional parking space being provided south of the existing parking space in front of the garage, separated by the footpath providing access to the front door.  This would result in the need to extend the dropped kerb closer to the pedestrian crossing and junction of William Sim Wood and Carnation Drive and as such this raised the concern that this would be detrimental to highway safety.  

An alternative motion to REFUSE the application was moved and seconded.  On being put to the vote the motion was CARRIED.

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.    The proposal by reason of its size, mass and position would result in a prominent feature within the streetscene that would be out of keeping with the character, and detrimental to visual amenities, of the area. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to Policy CS7 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document, 'Saved' Policy EN20 of Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.    The proposal to enlarge the dwellinghouse, involves the provision of an additional bedroom resulting in the need to provide a further parking space, the absence of which would result in additional on street parking detrimental to highway safety and flow of traffic.  The additional parking space would be located closer to the existing junction and pedestrian crossing, adversely affecting highway safety. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy CS23 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document, 'Saved' Policy M9 of the Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.