Agenda item

The report of the Chief Planning Officer advises the Panel of an application for a two storey rear extension at 43 New Sturton Lane, Garforth, Leeds, LS25 2NW.

(Report attached)

Before the commencement of Item 11 Cllr. Dobson removed himself from the Panel so that he could speak on behalf of the objectors as referred to in minute 4.

The report of the Chief Planning Officer set out the proposal for a two storey extension at 43, New Sturton Lane, Garforth, LS25 2NW.

Members had attended a site visit and were shown photographs and plans throughout the presentation.

Members heard that the application involved the removal of the existing conservatory and the construction of a two storey rear extension. This would build partly over the existing single storey rear extension and will stretch the full width or the rear elevation with a hipped roof. One new rear window was proposed and two new first floor windows. It would be set 1m away from the common boundary with no. 6 Braemar Drive. It was proposed that a side window to the extension would be obscure glazed.

It was noted that the houses in the immediate vicinity had staggered siting and many of the properties in the locality had been extended in some form.

It was also noted that at the request of officers the roof extension had been hipped to lessen the massing of the extension.

Members were informed that a number of representations had be made by the neighbours of 6 Braemar Drive whose property lies to the north raising concerns about overshadowing and loss of light to a side porch, and garden, their comments were maintained despite the revision to the scheme.

Cllr. Dobson spoke at the Plans Panel on behalf of Mr and Mrs Peverell of 6 Breamar Drive. Cllr. Dobson informed the Panel that the extension would impact on Mr and Mrs Peverell due to loss of light in their kitchen/dining area. He explained that although it was a large part of the living space it was a significantly gloomy area.

Cllr. Dobson said that the extension was an increase to the property of 50% and would over dominate and cause loss of light from about 2pm. Cllr. Dobson was of the opinion that 40 years ago when the properties were built they had been staggered to allow for more natural light to flow into the properties and that this should have significant weight to the objections raised.

Mrs Driver the applicant attended the Panel and addressed the Panel explaining that the extension was not a 50% increase to the upper floor. She also said that many houses in the area had been extended and it would be in keeping with the character of the area.

Mrs Driver said that the porch to the side of the neighbouring property was a secondary source of light as the neighbouring property did have a window to the rear.

Mrs Driver was of the view that due to the original staggering of the property there would be limit direct overshadowing and reasonable over dominance.

Group Manager Area Planning, David Newbury said that the scheme was policy compliant. He went on to explain, although there would be an impact on the light to the neighbouring property he clarified that the planning perspective viewed the main source of light to be from the rear window.

Members briefly discussed the overshadowing issue and although they were sympathetic to the issues raised by the neighbours they noted that the scheme was policy compliant.

RESOLVED – To grant permission as set out in the submitted report.