Agenda item

To consider the report of the Chief Planning Officer for an application for part three storey, part single storey side extension; single storey rear extension at 5 North Park Avenue, Lidgett Park, Leeds LS8 1DN.

(Report attached)

Members considered the report of the Chief Planning Officer on an application for part three storey, part single storey side extension; single storey rear extension at 5 North Park Avenue, Lidgett Park, Leeds LS8 1DN.

Members were advised of the following:-

·  Photographs circulated via email by the agent acting on behalf of the objector at number 5a should have been received by all Members of the Plans Panel. This was confirmed to be correct.

·  Typo in paragraph 2.2 the No. 5 at the end should read No. 5a

·  The agent had highlighted that two distances in paragraph 10.10 and 10.11 were wrong;

o   The distance quoted in paragraph 10.10 of 7.0 metres is considered accurate within 0.5 of a metre – the agent claimed it was 8.5 metres;

o  The distance quoted in paragraph 10.11 of 10 metres had been checked and was considered to be closer to the agent’s figure of 13.5.

o  Whilst the result of this was that the proposal had been assessed to be acceptable on the basis of the distances quoted in the report and so any actual increase in these distances was an improvement.

Members were advised that this was the second application that the applicant had submitted for this scheme. It was noted that the first application was made in 2017 (17/07631/FU) and is the subject of an appeal against non-determination. Members requested copies of the appeal and the planning response in future cases.

It was noted that the three storey side extension would be of similar proportion, scale and design to the three storey element of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling. The rear extension would also be of similar scale to the rear extension that exists on the neighbouring dwelling and this element of the scheme would not project beyond the rear extension of the adjoining property. A single storey side garage was proposed to the side of the house. This would feature a pitched roof and would abut the hedges that are present along the common boundary with no 5a North Park Avenue.

The Plans Panel were informed that the application site falls within the boundaries of the Roundhay Conservation Area.

This is a semi-detached stone built property. Members noted that the adjoining semi had a three storey gable and a single storey side garage. It was also noted that there were large trees located to the front garden and that the front garden was enclosed by hedges.

Members heard that objections had come from No 5a. It was noted that windows overlooking No 5a were to be obscure glazed. It was also noted that one of the objections was loss of light through the kitchen window at No 5a. Members were advised that as this was a kitchen and not a main living area and therefore was not sufficient to justify a refusal.

Ms Prior an objector attended the meeting with Dr Chris Hobbs who was available to answer questions.

Ms Prior informed the Panel of the following points of concern:-

·  Duplicate application which Fabian Hamilton MP was to discuss with Chief Planning Officer Tim Hill;

·  Contrary to design guidance;

·  Volume of building had increased;

·  Would change the character of the area;

·  Designated position of the building;

·  It would fill in the gaps between the buildings;

·  Loss of amenity to No 5a;

·  Loss of light through kitchen window at No 5a;

·  Fabian Hamilton MP considered the proposal overbearing, and over dominant;

·  MP had concerns in relation to on street parking;

·  The proposed dwelling was over development, overbearing, and a negative impact on the area.

Members were provided with guidance in relation to gap fills and of the process and reason for twin applications.

Mr Williams the applicant was at the meeting with his agent Grahame White.

Mr Williams had the following to say that the objector lived across the road and in his opinion people did not like change. Mr Williams read out a letter from an objector stating that the language used was emotive.

He said that work had been undertaken on the two properties either side of his house.

Mr Williams informed the Panel that he had bought the house in 2003 and gained planning permission in 2007. However at that time they had been unable to go ahead with the development which they believe would enhance the character of the area. Mr Williams said that he enjoyed living in Roundhay and wished to leave a legacy for Roundhay.

The following points were noted:-

·  That there was on street parking on North Avenue

·  There were no yellow lines on North Avenue

·  Hedge would be reduced and give more light to the kitchen of No 5a

·  The height of the garage could be lowered to give a more symmetrical look

·  Hardstanding was to be extended to allow for parking on site at No 5

RESOLVED - To defer and delegate approval subject to the receipt of a revised plan that reduces the height of the garage (single storey side extension).