|
|
APPLICATION NO. |
|
|
|
APPLICATION TYPE |
HOUSEHOLDER |
|
|
REGISTERED |
14.7.2023 |
|
|
PARISH |
HENLEY-ON-THAMES |
|
|
WARD MEMBERS |
Ken Arlett Kellie Hinton Stefan Gawrysiak |
|
|
APPLICANT |
Mr Luke Frost |
|
|
SITE |
167 Greys Road Henley-on-Thames, RG9 1TE |
|
|
PROPOSAL |
First-floor extension above the existing kitchen and bathroom. The extension will be comprised of 2x roof lights and 1x new sash windows to the rear elevation. |
|
|
OFFICER |
Hannah Smith |
|
1.0 |
INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSAL |
|
1.1 |
This application has been referred to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Ken Arlett.
|
|
1.2 |
167 Greys Road, as shown on the OS extract attached as Appendix A, is a terraced two-storey dwelling within the built-up limits of Henley-on-Thames. The building itself is not listed and does not lie within a specific designated area, however, part of Greys Road is located within the Henley Main Conservation Area and the street also includes listed buildings, therefore the impact on the historic character has also been taken into consideration.
|
|
1.3 |
The application seeks planning permission for the erection of a first-floor extension above the existing kitchen and bathroom. The submission of this application follows from the refusal of application P23/S1612/HH for a larger flat roofed two storey extension.
|
|
1.4 |
A copy of the proposed plans is attached as Appendix B whilst other documentation associated with the application can be viewed on the council’s website, www.southoxon.gov.uk. |
|
2.0 |
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS & REPRESENTATIONS |
|
2.1 |
Full copies of the representations are available on the Council’s website at www.southoxon.gov.uk under the planning reference number.
|
|
2.2 |
Henley-on-Thames Town Council – The Town Council recommend refusal on the grounds that the application is misleading as the drawings submitted do not show the current situation of the property. The proposed extension does not conform to minimum room sizes and there would be a loss of amenity for the neighbouring property due to loss of light.
|
|
2.3 |
No neighbour comments have been received. |
|
3.0 |
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY |
|
3.1 |
P23/S2192/HH - Refused (30/08/2023) Part demolition of an existing ground floor single-storey kitchen/wc and erection of a two storey rear extension.
P23/S1612/HH - Refused (07/07/2023) Single-storey, pitched roof, rear side return extension to existing dwelling and erection of first-floor extension above existing kitchen and bathroom.
P23/S1505/HH - Approved (13/06/2023) Proposed dormer window to principal elevation.
P23/S1611/PDH - Approved (09/06/2023) Single-storey, flat roof, rear side return extension to existing dwelling comprised of 3x roof lights and aluminium bifold doors to rear. Depth: 5.16M Height: 3.00m Height to Eaves: 2.90m
P23/S1141/LDP - Approved (14/04/2023) Loft conversion comprising full-width flat roof dormer and 2x roof lights to principal elevation. |
|
4.0 |
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT |
|
4.1 |
N/A |
|
5.0 |
POLICY & GUIDANCE |
|
5.1 |
Development Plan Policies |
|
|
South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2035 (SOLP) Policies: DES1 - Delivering High Quality Development DES2 - Enhancing Local Character DES6 - Residential Amenity DES8 - Promoting Sustainable Design ENV6 - Historic Environment H20 - Extensions to Dwellings ENV8 - Conservation Areas HEN1 - The Strategy for Henley-on-Thames STRAT1 - The Overall Strategy
|
|
5.2 |
Joint Henley and Harpsden Neighbourhood Plan 2022 referendum version policies: |
|
|
SD3 - Local Character
|
|
5.3 |
Supplementary Planning Guidance/Documents |
|
|
South Oxfordshire and Vale of White Horse Joint Design Guide 2022
|
|
5.4 |
National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance
|
|
5.5 |
Other Relevant Legislation |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
Equality Act 2010 In determining this planning application the Council has regard to its equalities obligations including its obligations under Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. |
|
6.0 |
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS |
|
6.1 |
The relevant planning considerations are the following:
· Design and character · Residential amenity
|
|
6.2 |
Design and character
· Policy H20 of the SOLP 2035 states that extensions to dwellings or the erection and extension of ancillary buildings within the curtilage of a dwelling, will be permitted provided that amenity areas are provided for the extended dwelling that accord with the South Oxfordshire Design Guide; and the proposal does not conflict with other policies in the Development Plan.
· Policy DES1 of the SOLP 2035 states that all new development must be of a high quality design that reflects the positive features that make up the character of the local area and both physically and visually enhances and compliments the surroundings.
The JDG advises that extensions use simple, uncomplicated building forms that complement and coordinate with the scale, form and massing of the original dwelling.
|
|
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
|
The proposal has been submitted following the refusal of applications P23/S1612/HH and P23/S2192/HH which were refused planning permission because the proposals would have resulted in an incongruous and discordant addition, which would detract from the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the wider built form and the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. Copies of the elevations associated with these applications are attached as Appendix C.
The proposal within this application seeks to retain the single storey element at the same depth of 5 metres and is to widen the existing extension to 3.5 metres in width, so that it is to be built right up to the boundary, however, it will be built to a height of 2.8 metres only.
The criticisms of the previously refused applications have been addressed and officers consider the form and scale of the upper storey extension to be more in-keeping with the character and appearance of the existing building and surrounding traditional built form and in officers’ view the extension would be subservient to the existing dwelling.
Several dwellings within Greys Road and the wider urban area have received planning permission for an upper storey extension to be built above the single storey element, and the form and modest scale of the development proposed would be consistent with how other historic terraced dwellings within the town have been extended.
Overall, the proposed extension is in accordance with the current development plan policies and guidance contained within the JDG, and officers consider that the development of the proposed design and at this size and scale would respect the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding built form.
|
|
6.8 |
Residential amenity
· Policy DES6 of the SOLP 2035 states that development proposals should demonstrate that they will not result in significant adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring uses, including through the loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight
· Paragraph 5.33 of the Built Form section of the Joint Design Guide states that developers and applicants should be mindful of the impact of their proposals on the amenity of future and existing adjacent occupiers. Proposals should not give rise to any unacceptable harm.
|
|
6.9 |
The proposed depth and width of the upper storey extension complies with the 45-degree test to ensure there would be no material loss of light to the rear elevations of either the 169 or 165 greys road. With the reduced depth of the upper storey extension compared to the earlier schemes Officers also consider that the extension would also not result in any significant loss of outlook or light to the neighbouring garden areas. There are no side facing windows that would result in loss of privacy to the neighbouring dwellings.
|
|
6.10 |
Community Infrastructure Levy The proposal is not CIL liable as the proposed development would not result in a floor area in excess of 100 square metres.
|
|
6.11 |
Pre-commencement conditions No conditions are recommended that require details to be agreed prior to the commencement of any development. |
|
7.0 |
CONCLUSION |
|
7.1 |
Officers consider that the proposal complies with the relevant Development Plan policies and, subject to the recommended conditions, the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of its relationship to the character of the existing dwelling, its site and it is also acceptable in terms of its impact on neighbouring amenity. |
|
8.0 |
RECOMMENDATION |
|
|
That Planning Permission is granted subject to the following conditions:
|
|
|
1 : Commencement of development within 3 years 2 : Development to be in accordance with the approved plans 3 : Materials & details to be as shown on plans & supporting documents |
Author: Hannah Smith
Email: Planning@southandvale.gov.uk
Tel: 01235 422600