|
|
APPLICATION NO. |
|
|
|
SITE |
42 Hutchcomb Road, Oxford, OX2 9HL |
|
|
PARISH |
NORTH HINKSEY |
|
|
PROPOSAL |
|
|
|
WARD MEMBER(S) |
Debby Hallett Emily Smith |
|
|
APPLICANT |
Mr & Mrs Smith |
|
|
OFFICER |
Lewis Dixey |
|
|
RECOMMENDATION |
|
|
Planning Permission granted, subject to the following conditions: Standard Conditions: 1. Commencement within three years 2. Approved plans list
Compliance condition: 3. Parking spaces to be implemented in accordance with plans 4. Materials in accordance with application details
|
|
1.0 |
INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSAL |
|
|
1.1 |
This application is referred to committee as the applicant is an elected member.
|
|
|
1.2 |
The property is a detached dwelling located within a residential area of North Hinksey. Neighbouring dwellings share boundaries to the north, south and rear (west) of the plot. Highway access on to Hutchcomb Road is obtained at the front of the site, to the east.
|
|
|
1.3 |
The application seeks planning permission for a single storey rear extension, raised terrace and loft conversion with rear facing dormer window.
|
|
|
1.4 |
The rear extension would replace an existing conservatory to create increased living space and a fourth bedroom would be added via the conversion of the loft space.
|
|
|
1.5 |
A site location plan is provided below, and the application plans are attached at Appendix 1.
|
|
|
2.0 |
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS & REPRESENTATIONS |
||||||
|
2.1 |
|
|
3.0 |
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY |
|
3.1 |
P21/V2921/PD – Advice provided (21/12/2021) Dropped kerb
P20/V3188/HH – Approved (16/02/2021) Loft conversion and ground floor rear extension
|
|
4.0 |
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT |
|
4.1 |
Householder development does not fall within the defined scope for potential EIA development. |
|
5.0 |
MAIN ISSUES The main relevant planning considerations are the following: · Design and character · Residential amenity · Access and parking
|
|
5.1 |
Design and character The proposal would demolish the existing conservatory and replace it with single-storey rear extension spanning the full width of the rear elevation to a depth of 5.5m and projecting out 1.69m off the northern side. The extension would create an enlarged kitchen / living space opening out onto a raised terrace providing more practical amenity space as the land slopes steeply downhill away from the dwelling and also downhill from south to north. The twin gable design would be finished in brickwork with a standing seam zinc roof and is considered to be of a subservient scale in relation to the original building, complying with the advice within the council’s Design Guide SPD.
|
|
5.2 |
Planning permission has previously been granted under reference P20/V3188/HH for a similar scheme. This application differs by condensing the new built form closer to the main dwelling with a more visually appealing and simplified design.
|
|
5.3 |
The proposed loft conversion would include a full width rear facing dormer window and four front facing rooflights. The works would create a fourth bedroom and officers are mindful that a similar conversion could be achieved via permitted development rights. At the front, four rooflights are proposed along with a minor extension of the roof slope to create a canopy over the front entrance.
|
|
5.4 |
The proposed works are considered in-keeping with the character of the area, which includes many varied forms of extended dwellings. Taking into account the previously approved scheme and what could be achieved under permitted development, the works are considered acceptable, and the design and appearance of the proposed development is in compliance with Policy CP37 of the Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1 and the advice contained within the Design Guide SPD and the NPPF.
|
|
5.5 |
Residential Amenity One letter of objection from a neighbouring property has been received, along with a comment from the parish council which both raise concerns regarding the proposed development having an adverse impact on neighbouring property No.44 in terms of overshadowing and loss of daylight to a ground floor lounge and first floor study. A site visit has been conducted to assess this impact and observations find that the application site is set down from No.44 due to the difference in land level. Being a single storey design with an eaves height of 2.5m, officers cannot find significant harm to neighbour amenity. Furthermore, the rear extension would only project 0.7m more than the approved works which is 1.5m over what could be achieved without permission under permitted development. Officers note the comment from the parish council regarding the 45 degree principle set out in the Council’s Design Guide SPD 2015. However, this relates to two storey extensions. The proposed extension here is single storey in height, and as set out above is modest in scale and would not be dominant or visually intrusive to neighbouring properties.
|
|
5.6 |
The proposal includes a raised terrace to make better use of the sloping rear amenity space. Following assessment during the site visit, officers are satisfied that this would not present harmful overlooking.
|
|
5.7 |
In terms of loss of light and overshadowing, the application site is directly north of No.44. Given the suns southerly path, officers do not consider that the proposed single storey rear extension or dormer window would cause overshadowing or loss of light significant enough to warrant refusal of the application.
|
|
5.8 |
The accuracy of the original elevation plans was questioned as it showed No.44 having implemented an approved extension which has yet to be constructed. A revised plan has been submitted to show the existing building to avoid confusion.
|
|
5.9 |
Taking into account the orientation of the property and its relationship with the surrounding dwellings, officers do not consider that the proposal would harm the amenities of any of the neighbouring properties in terms of dominance, overshadowing or overlooking. It is considered to comply with Policy DP23 of the Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 2 and the advice contained within the Design Guide SPD and the NPPF.
|
|
5.10
5.11 |
Access and parking The proposal involves the demolition of an existing garage on the site and the creation of a fourth bedroom within the converted loft. The County Council highways officer has been consulted and raises no objections to the works. Two parking spaces have been demonstrated on the existing driveway and measurements confirm that these would meet county standards. A compliance condition has been added accordingly to ensure implementation and retention of these spaces.
Taking into account the scale and nature of the proposal, and the provision of adequate parking provision to mitigate the proposed works, the development is considered to comply with Polices CP35 and CP37 of the adopted Local Plan 2031 Part 1 as reviewed, Policy DP16 of the adopted Local Plan 2031 Part 2 and Policies TR1 and TR2 of the North Hinksey Neighbourhood Plan 2031.
|
|
5.12 |
CIL The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a levy charged on new development in the Vale. The money raised will be used to fund infrastructure to support growth in the district. The proposed additional floorspace would be below 100sqm and therefore the proposal would not be CIL liable.
|
|
6.0 |
CONCLUSION |
|
6.1 |
In the absence of any negative weight that can be attached to the proposal, in the form of identified harm from any material consideration, officers consider the outcome of the planning balance is that the proposal complies with the provisions of the development plan, in particular policies CP35 and CP37 of the adopted Local Plan 2031 Part 1 as reviewed and Policies DP16 and DP23 of the adopted Vale of White Horse Plan 2031 Part 2. The proposal is also considered to comply with the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework and the council’s adopted Design Guide SPD 2015.
|
|
|
The following planning policies have been taken into account:
Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1 Policies: CP35 – Promoting Public Transport, Cycling and Walking CP37 – Design and Local Distinctiveness
A Regulation 10A review (five-year review) for Local Plan Part 1 (LPP1) has been completed. The review shows that five years on, LPP1 (together with LPP2) continues to provide a suitable framework for development in the Vale of White Horse that is in overall conformity with government policy.
Vale of White Horse Local Plan Part 2 Policies:
DP16 – Access DP23 – Impact of Development on Amenity
North Hinksey Neighbourhood Plan (NHNP) (2021) TR1 Cyclists, pedestrians and public transport TR2 Parking, Access and Electric Vehicle Charging
|
|
|
Vale of White Horse Design Guide SPD 2015
|
|
|
National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Practice Guidance
|
|
|
Other legislation Equalities Act 2010 The proposal has been assessed against section 149 of the Equalities Act. It is considered that no identified group will suffer discrimination as a result of this proposal.
Human Rights Act 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 have been taken into account in the processing of the application and the preparation of this report.
|
|
|
|