DELEGATED REPORT SHEET

APPLICATION NUMBER: 20180942

Single Storey Orangery Extension, First Floor Extension PROPOSAL: and Porch Extension

ADDRESS: Southview, 29 Westgate Green, Hevingham, NR10 5RF

CONSULTATIONS: Pollution Control Officer: No comment.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS:

No Objection from 25-27 Westgate Green, Hevingham: I have no objection to the development at number 29 and wish the applicant good luck with the project.

No comments received following the re-consultation.

Objection from 31 Westgate Green, Hevingham: We are the neighbours on the North side of this proposed development at number 31 Westgate Green and feel we would be affected by this if it goes ahead.

We have lived at this address for 31 years and have enjoyed the view from our back garden, seeing wildlife, birds and open views to the countryside.

As you will see from the pictures enclosed, the applicants elevation proposed for the main house and added on orangery would be overlooking our side garden. We have no objections to this in principal. But we must object strongly to the new replacement garage / workshop. This is going to be situated directly behind our back garden fence. We are unsure of the size but think this could be approx. 4m to the ridge 6m long x 7m wide and will be also closed in on our side of the construction.

You will see from the pictures where our back door and conservatory are situated this would mean that our view and enjoyment would be severely affected.

So to confirm, we have no objections to the extension to the main house, but we must strongly object to the new garage / workshop situated behind out back fence and would hope the applicant would reconsider positioning it somewhere else where it would not spoil our view.

Comments received following the re-consultation:

No formal comments were received, however a telephone conversation was had between the neighbouring property at number 31 Westgate Green and the case officer for the application. The neighbour still objects to the garage / cart shed in its current location even though it has been removed from the planning application.

Officer note – advised the neighbour that as the garage / cart shed has been reduced in height and conforms with the criteria for permitted development, it is therefore outside of the control of the Local Planning Authority.

Objection from 24 Westgate Green, Hevingham (on the revised plans): Having viewed the amended plans, the same situation of the Cartshed being sited in the same position has not changed.

It may have been removed from the Planning Application but is still being erected under the Permitted Development Rights for Outbuildings.

The Cartshed although being reduced in height to comply with the above Development Rights still does not address the fact that if is being placed in the wrong location for the neighbouring dwelling, Irving 31 Westgate Green, the residents who have lived there for 30 years will now have to look onto a wall outside their back door as their fence is approximately 6ft away. There is plenty of land at 29 where a Cartshed could be erected without spoiling the quality of life of neighbours who are of pensionable age.

Has anyone from the planning department been out to view the submitted plans prior to the amendments?

I know the erection of the Cartshed no longer comes under their department but they could pass the Single Storey Orangery Extension, First Floor Extension and Porch which their neighbours have no objections too but not allow the Cartshed to be erected under the Permitted Development Rights for Development which I believed is in their power to do so.

HELLESDON PARISH COUNCIL: Whilst the Parish Council have no objections to the extensions to this property they share neighbours concerns regarding the positioning of the new cart shed, which will affect the neighbours amenity.

(The applicant informed the Parish Council that she is prepared to decrease the size of the shed to 6 metres and build it of brick instead of timber however it was felt that this would not alter the neighbours outlook to any worthwhile degree).

Comments received following the re-consultation:

The Parish Council are still not happy with the siting of the cart shed and would reiterate their original comments. The cart shed could easily be sited in another place which would not affect the neighbours amenity.

As a result of the cart shed being reduced in size the Parish Council appreciate the building of this is now outside of planning control but the building of it is causing much distress to a neighbour who is now talking about moving after 31 years in their home, if this is built. The Parish Council strongly object to the cart shed being placed where it is indicated and would therefore like consideration given to removing Permitted Development Rights to prevent this cart shed being built.

WARD MEMBER (Cllr Paul Carrick): There is a risk of restricting the neighbours outlook etc. by having the cart shed / garage so close to their boundary when there is more than enough room one the double garage is demolished to extend the original driveway and erect the building beyond the orangery.

I hope this suggested change would be agreed with the applicant and all parties would have what they are looking for.

Comments received following the re-consultation:

No formal comments were received, however a telephone conversation was had between Cllr Carrick and the case officer for the application confirming that the garage / cart shed has been removed due to being reduced in height to conform with permitted development rights and it is therefore outside of the control of the Local Planning Authority.

SITE NOTICE: N/A

POLICY FRAMEWORK: National Planning Policy Framework 2018

Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk March 2011 and as amended (2014) Policy 2 – Promoting good design

Broadland Development Management DPD 2015 Policy GC4 – Design

PRE-APPLICATION ADVICE: Informal meeting with the duty planning officer regarding design proposals.

PLANS AND DOCUMENTS: Dwg No R_2286_01 Existing Site Layout received 05 June 2018 Dwg No R_2286_02 Existing Floor Plans received 05 June 2018 Dwg No R_2286_03 Existing Elevations received 05 June 2018 Dwg No R_2286_04 Existing Garage Elevations received 05 June 2018 Dwg No P_2286_11 Proposed Floor Plans received 05 June 2018 Dwg No P_2286_12 Proposed Elevations received 05 June 2018 Dwg No P_2286_13 Proposed Garage Floor Plan_ Elevations and Section received 05 June 2018 Design and Access Statement received 05 June 2018 Amended Dwg No P_2286_10_B Site Location and Site Layout Received 30 July 2018 Amended Dwg No P_2286_13_B Proposed Floor Plans Received 30 July 2018

CIL LIABILITY: Not CIL Liable

RECOMMENDATIONS:

APPROVE, subject to the following condition:

 A1 - The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than THREE years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

 E3 - The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in accordance with the plans and documents listed below.

Reasons for Conditions:

 R2 - The time limit is imposed in compliance with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 R15 - For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure the satisfactory development of the site in accordance with the specified approved plans and documents.

INFORMATIVES:

 INF27 – Building Regulations

 INF40 – Positive and Proactive Approach

 NS – This planning permission does not grant approval for the detached garage / cart shed as shown on Drawing Number P/2286/10B.

REASONS: The application has been considered against the Development Plan for the area, this being the Joint Core Strategy (JCS) for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk 2011 as amended 2014 and the Development Management DPD (2015). The policies of particular relevance to the determination of this application are Policy 2 of the JCS and Policy GC4 of the Development Management DPD (2015). The National Planning Policy Framework is also a material consideration.

This application seeks planning permission for a single storey orangery extension, a first floor extension and a porch extension.

The application has been altered since first submission and a garage / cart shed has been omitted from the application. The garage / cart shed, since first submission, has been reduced in height to conform with permitted development for outbuildings as defined within Class A, Part E of the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) 2015.

The existing property is detached with a gable end which faces the road, has a single storey extension, has a double garage to the rear of the property and sits on a generous sized plot.

The proposed extensions comprise of a master bedroom and en-suite at first floor, an orangery extension with a roof lantern on the ground floor and an open porch also on the ground floor. There will also be a number of associated internal alterations to facilitate the proposed development.

The first floor extension will continue the existing ridge line of the existing property and will use external materials which will match the existing property.

The orangery will extend out by approx. 4.5m and will be approx. 6m in width. The proposed orangery will be approx. 2.46m in height with a total height of approx. 3.15m which includes a roof lantern. A flue will also be installed on this roof and will protrude approx. 1.75m above the parapet roof. The proposed orangery will be constructed from Norfolk red brick and will include white UPVC windows to match the existing property.

The proposed porch will be constructed on the south east facing elevation and will be constructed from re-claimed roof tiles and ridges, will be oak framed and will have oak feather edged boarding on the gablets. The proposed porch will project out approx. 1.5m from the south east elevation and will be approx. 3.05m in total height.

It is considered that the proposed extensions to the property will not have a detrimental effect on the character or appearance of the area or have an adverse impact on the street scene of Westgate Green as they are located towards the south west of the site which is the furthest elevation from the road.

The proposed extensions will be in-keeping with the host dwelling using appropriate external materials and designs. The appearance of the extensions will not appear overbearing or appear cramped on the site due to the size of the plot the property is located. It is considered that the proposed extensions will not cause a detrimental impact on neighboring amenity.

The parish council and seven neighbouring properties were consulted on the application. The parish council and one neighbouring property objected to the original proposal which included a garage / cart shed with one further neighbouring property raising no objection. Following a re-consultation after amended plans were received which removed the garage / cart shed from the planning application, the parish council and one additional neighbouring property raised objections to the revised scheme. These objections were based around the garage / car port which had been removed from the application. Details of all consultation responses are detailed in the neighbour representations part of this delegated report.

Comments have been raised for the Local Planning Authority to remove permitted development rights for outbuildings if the proposed extensions to the property are approved. Consideration has been given to the removal of permitted development rights for outbuildings, however, conditions should be kept to a minimum only be imposed if meeting the 6 tests for planning conditions.

Paragraph 55 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2018 states ‘Planning conditions should be kept to a minimum and only imposed where they are necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects.’

It is considered that removing permitted development rights for outbuildings would not be necessary or reasonable when approving the extensions to the property. The property sits on a large plot and it would therefore be unreasonable to remove these specific permitted development rights.

The proposal detailed above is considered to be an acceptable form of development and is also considered to be in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework. The Local Planning Authority has taken a proactive and positive approach to decision taking in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

SIGNATURE: E. Yarham DATE: 17th August 2018