Agenda item

The application was reported to the Planning Committee at the request of the local Ward Councillor.

Having declared in relation to the item, Councillor Fry, retired to the public Gallery and Councillor William Boyd took over the Chair for the agenda item. Councillor Fry addressed the committee as Ward Member during public speaking, then retired from the committee room and took no part in the debate or decision thereof.

Officers presented the report and in doing so, drew Members’ attention to the presentation slides on pages 5 to 22 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack.

The application was for 3 Southcrest Road, Redditch, Worcestershire, B98 7JG and sought a Rear single storey extension and two storey side garage and bedroom extension.

Officers detailed that the property was a 3 bedroom dwelling which sat in a elevated and prominent position.

Members attention was drawn to the current and proposed site plans detailed on pages 12 and 13 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack. Officers explained the extent of the works to Members, which would increase the number of bedrooms to 8 with 3 new bedrooms on the first floor with an additional 2 in the dormer loft.

The planning history was detailed on page 18 of the Public Reports pack and pages 15 to 20 of the Site Plans and Presentations pack. Officers clarified the Planning history in that:

• The application 20/01047/FUL was received in 2020 which sought a two-storey side extension. This application was refused, on the grounds that it was too imposing on the surrounding dwellings considering the prominence of the location and that the plans did not step back the extension.
• An appeal was dismissed on 16.06.2021.
• A second application 21/01720/FUL was submitted in 2021 which proposed stepping back the extension to be less imposing and therefore, approval was granted.
• A third application 24/00047/FUL was submitted in 2024 for a larger extension which included a dormer loft conversion. The application was refused as the development once again was not stepped back.

Officers clarified that the second application 21/01720/FUL remained implementable and was for a two-storey side and single storey rear extension.

The application was recommended for refusal on the grounds that a new rear window was overlooking local properties and that the plans were not stepped back.

At the invitation of the Chair, Councillor Andy Fry, Ward Member, and Mrs Asya Parveen, the applicant, addressed the Committee in support of the application.

The following was clarified follow questions from members.

• That the 2020 application was refused as it was deemed out of character for the area being unnecessarily imposing as it was not stepped back.
• The 2021 application remedied the stepping back and was thus approved.
• That although Officers could not identify an exact figure the size of the proposed extension was in excess of an increase of 100% of the footprint of the dwelling.
• That there was a privacy concern in relation to No6 which was 9.3m away from an overlooking window created by the application.

Members then proceeded to debate the application.

Members noted that they can only consider the application which was in front of them, however, they did have regard to the prior planning history and the fact that there was an existing approved application for the site. Members expressed the opinion that the 2021 approved application was a more modest application, and the proposed development was very extensive and imposing.

Members also addressed the fact that there were no concerns raised by neighbours, however, it was noted that future occupants may not share the same view, therefore, more weight was given to the planning policies and guidance.

On being put to a vote it was

RESOLVED that

having had regard to the development plan and to all other material considerations, that planning permission be REFUSED, for the reasons as detailed on page 24 of the Public Reports pack.