Agenda item

Erection of a single storey roof extension at third floor level to create a 1 bedroom residential flat, external alterations including creation of lift shaft to rear, and creation of front roof terrace fronting Wakley Street.

Reason for reconsultation: Revised design of roof extension, revised drawings and Design and Access Statement and submission of daylight and sunlight report.

(Planning application number: P2017/2243/FUL)

In the discussion the following points were made:

·         The planning officer stated that Paragraph 10.74 of the officer report should not have referred to a failure in the BRE test as it was compliant.

·         The planning officer advised that the cumulative impact of this application and Item B3. Clarissa Baldwin House had been considered and the windows would still pass the BRE tests if both developments took place.

·         Concern was raised that the roof area facing on to City Road could be used as a roof terrace. The applicant stated that the existing balustrade was part of the original building. It was not high enough or with narrow enough gaps between the bars to meet the requirements for a roof terrace. He confirmed that the area would not be used as a roof terrace and would only be accessed for maintenance. The roof area facing onto Wakley Street would be used as a roof terrace and the balustrade would have a glass panel behind the original balustrade to ensure it met current regulations.

·         In response to a member’s question about the materials to be used, the planning officer replied that there was a proposed a condition on materials. The materials used on the front of the building would match the existing materials. Regarding the back of the extension, the planning officers would generally discourage render and promote the use of bricks. The design and conservation officer would be consulted when the materials were submitted for approval. The applicant confirmed that the materials used at the front and back of the extension would match the existing materials.

·         In response to a member’s question about an emergency exit in the event of a fire, the applicant advised that there was a staircase and all building regulations would be met, including those in relation to fire and accessibility.

·         Concern was raised that the obscurely glazed window at the back of the extension could be changed to clear glazing in time. The planning officer advised that it could be conditioned that the obscurely glazed window be non openable and retained in perpetuity.

·         Objectors were advised that if there were any breaches to conditions, they could report it to the council.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to add a condition that there be inward opening doors onto the roof area facing on to City Road with a Juliet balcony preventing access to the roof area. This was seconded by Councillor Chapman and carried.

Councillor Convery proposed a motion that the details of the Juliet balcony should be submitted to the local planning authority for approval. This was seconded by Councillor Chapman and carried.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion that Condition 3 be amended to state that the materials and detailing should reflect and replicate the existing materials. This was seconded by Councillor Chapman and carried.

Councillor Klute proposed a motion to add a condition that the obscurely glazed window to the rear of the extension be non-openable and retained in perpetuity. This was seconded by Councillor Chapman and carried.

RESOLVED:

That planning permission be granted subject to the conditions and informatives set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report with the additional and amended conditions outlined above and subject to the prior completion of a Deed of Planning Obligation made under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 securing the heads of terms as set out in Appendix 1 of the officer report.