Issue - meetings

Proposal Description: Demolition of an existing rear conservatory and construction of a new single-storey rear extension. Conversion and extension of an existing garage to habitable accommodation.

The application was introduced. Members were referred to the update sheet which provided additional information regarding the following matters.

During public participation, Richard Pennell spoke in objection to the application, and Andy Partridge (Agent) spoke in support of the application and answered members' questions.

Councillor Susan Cook spoke as a ward member against the application and expressed several points on behalf of residents which could be summarised as follows:

1. That, considering the Twyford Neighbourhood Plan and the South Downs National Plan policy, the application should be refused as it appeared not to meet certain policies.
2. That, the concerns included issues of being out of character, loss of privacy, loss of light, increase in noise, and disturbance to both adjacent residents and those behind.
3. That, the proposed application was overbearing in its design and would be detrimental to the amenity of nearby neighbours.
4. That, the original home had two bedrooms, but with the addition of a staircase and Velux windows, it could potentially be turned into a three-bedroom property.
5. That, there were concerns about the proposed new bedroom's increased height being significantly higher than the current conservatory.
6. That, the Twyford Local Plan contains policies for local housing needs to protect the limited supply of smaller properties within the national park.
7. That concerns had been raised regarding the 30% limit on household extensions.
8. That, the proposal sought to extend the use of the garage as a kitchen, which was not originally intended and may affect the enjoyment and value of adjacent properties.
9. That, the planning officer's report mentioned no objections in terms of design impairments, but the resident of the neighbouring property, did raise objections.
10. That, Planning Policy stated proposals should be of a high standard of design and be sympathetic to minimize overshadowing and light deprivation.
11. That, as a committee, there was a responsibility to ensure any changes to existing homes enhance the environment for the majority and consider the impact on neighbours.
12. That, the current application did not meet these criteria, and the application should be refused.

The committee proceeded to ask questions and debate the application.

RESOLVED

The committee agreed to grant permission for the reasons and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.