| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The removal of the front boundary wall and loss of soft landscaping to facilitate the parking area forward of the front elevation would be detrimental to the prevailing character of this row of terrace properties fronting Church Road, where parking to the front of properties is uncommon and front gardens provide a regular and reoccurring feature in the streetscape. This is contrary to adopted policies CS09 A and H9 A which seeks to ensure that development respects the surrounding built character. |
| 2. | The proposal removes the half-gable dormer that sits above the existing front elevation bedroom window and which forms an important part of the rhythm to the development of the other 4 houses in the existing terrace row fronting Church Road. The proposal not only fails to re-provide a similar gable on the new extension but also appears to remove the existing gable half dormer from the existing dwelling's front elevation too. This removes a feature which ties the property into the rest of the terrace and the loss of this would detrimentally affect the character and appearance of the dwelling and the terrace as a whole.
The application therefore does not comply with adopted policies CS09 A or with H9 A. |
| 3. | Due to the proximity of the extension to the northern boundary, the proposal would have an overbearing impact on and dominant relationship with the neighbour to the north. As the extension is full height at the eaves, this also increases the likelihood of overshadowing to an extent which would be harmful to neighbouring amenity - especially to the rear rooms of no.167 Church Road. This is contrary to adopted policies CS09 F and A1 which seeks to protect the amenity of existing residents. |
| 4. | The proposal does not incorporate adequate facilities to enable a vehicle to turn on the site and so enter the highway in a forward gear which is considered essential in the interests of road safety. The proposal is therefore unable to demonstrate the continued safe and free flow of traffic on the adjoining highway,nor provide evidence of appropriate access into the site, contrary to adopted policies CS09 E and CS16 from the adopted Core Strategy. |
| 5. | STATEMENT OF POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT (REFUSALS): In accordance with the NPPF, in determining this application for planning permission, the Borough Council has approached it in a positive and proactive way and where possible has sought solutions to problems to achieve the aim of approving sustainable development. Unfortunately, despite this, in this particular case the development is not considered to represent sustainable or an acceptable form of development and has been refused for the reasons set out above. |
