Planning Search

1)

By reason of their bulk and detailed design, the proposed extensions would detract from the appearance of the existing building and the terrace of which it forms a part, and would fail to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Pembridge Conservation Area. Therefore the development is considered contrary to Council policy as stated in the Unitary Development Plan, in particular Chapter 4, Policies CD25, CD41, CD52 and CD53.

2)

The proposed French windows would invite use of the rear second floor flat roof as a terrace. Such use would result in disturbance and loss of privacy to adjoining premises, contrary to Council policies as stated in the Unitary Development Plan, Chapter 4, Policies CD30, CD34 and CD40(a). The associated physical alterations necessary for safety reasons would be visually intrusive, contrary to Policy CD40(b) of the Unitary Development Plan.

1)

Unique Informative
This decision relates to the proposed first and second floor residential extensions to No. 206A only and does not relate to the alterations and extensions to the basement and ground floor restaurant premises at No. 206, for which a separate town planning application is required. This application is considered premature in the absence of planning permission for extension at ground floor level in the light well area beneath the proposed extension. The proposed French windows would invite use of the rear second floor flat roof as a terrace. Such use would result in disturbance and loss of privacy to adjoining premises, contrary to Council policies as stated in the Unitary Development Plan, Chapter 4, Policies CD30, CD34 and CD40(a). The associated physical alterations necessary for safety reasons would be visually intrusive, contrary to Policy CD40(b).

2)

Unique Informative
This application is considered premature in the absence of planning permission for extension at ground floor level in the light well area beneath the proposed extension.