Proposal: Extend existing pitched roof, install dormers to front and rear, erect front, side and rear extensions and alter elevations to existing building to form six self-contained flats with balconies/terraces, associated parking, amenity space, refuse/cycle store and install vehicle access onto Thames Drive (Amended proposal).

Applicant: Mr Paul Miller

Agent: BDA

Resolved:-

That PLANNING PERMISSION be REFUSED for the following reasons:

01 The proposed development, by reason of its excessive scale, footprint, mass, siting, unresolved design and materials, is considered to have a detrimental impact on the grain, character and appearance of the site and the wider area and would be an over scaled and incongruous addition to the streetscene. The proposal is therefore unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policies KP2 and CP4 of the Core Strategy (2007), Policies DM1, DM3 and DM6 of the Development Management Document (2015) and the Design and Townscape Guide (2009).

02 The proposal fails to meet the requirements of the Nationally Described Space Standards (2015) in relation to flat E and the development as a whole fails to provide an adequate standard of amenity space for future occupiers. The proposal overall will therefore result in a poor standard of accommodation for future occupiers and is unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policies KP2 and CP4 of the Core Strategy (2007), Policies DM1, DM3 and DM8 of the Development Management Document (2015) and the Design and Townscape Guide (2009).

03The proposed parking arrangements and associated vehicular movements at the site would result in an increased level of noise and disturbance which would be to the detriment of the amenities of 104 Thames Drive. The proposal is therefore unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policies KP2 and CP4 of the Core Strategy (2007), Policies DM1, DM3 and DM6 of the Development Management Document (2015) and the Design and Townscape Guide (2009).

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and determining the application within a timely manner, clearly setting out the reason(s) for refusal, allowing the Applicant the opportunity to consider the harm caused and whether or not it can be remedied by a revision to the proposal.  The detailed analysis is set out in a report prepared by officers. In the circumstances the proposal is not considered to be sustainable development. The Local Planning Authority is willing to discuss the best course of action.

Informatives

01 Please note that this application would be liable for a payment under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) if planning permission had been granted. Therefore if an appeal is lodged and subsequently allowed, the CIL liability will be applied. Any revised application would also be CIL liable.