No:

BH2023/02727

Ward:

Westdene & Hove Park Ward

App Type:

Householder Planning Consent

 

Address:

137 Goldstone Crescent Hove BN3 6BB     

 

Proposal:

Erection of first floor extension with pitched roof incorporating new window to front and west facing elevations and a single storey rear extension (part retrospective)

 

 

 

Officer:

Nathaniel Rainier, tel:

Valid Date:

19.10.2023

 

Con Area:

 

Expiry Date: 

14.12.2023

 

Listed Building Grade: 

EOT:

 

Agent:

Architecture Of Calm   95 Denton Road   Denton   Newhaven   BN9 0QE              

Applicant:

Mr M Varagoulis   137 Goldstone Crescent   Hove   BN3 6BB                 

 

 

 

1.               RECOMMENDATION

 

1.1.          That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out below and resolves to GRANT planning permission subject to the following Conditions and Informatives:

 

Conditions:

1.         The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings listed below.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Plan Type

Reference

Version

Date Received

Location and block plan

  

15 December 2023

Proposed Drawing

01  

15 December 2023

 

2.         The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To ensure that the Local Planning Authority retains the right to review unimplemented permissions.

 

3.         At least one bee brick shall be incorporated within the external wall of the development hereby approved and shall be retained thereafter.

Reason: To enhance the biodiversity of the site and to comply with Policy DM37 of Brighton & Hove City Plan Part 2, Policy CP10 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One and Supplementary Planning Document SPD11 Nature Conservation and Development.

 

4.         The external finishes of the development hereby permitted shall match in material, colour, style, bonding and texture those of the existing building.

 

Reason:  To ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and to comply with policies DM18/DM21/DM26 of Brighton & Hove City Plan Part 2 and CP12/CP15 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One.

 

5.         The window in the west elevation of the development hereby permitted shall be obscure glazed and non-opening, unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed, and thereafter permanently retained as such.

Reason:  To safeguard the privacy of the occupiers of the adjoining property and to comply with Policies DM20 and DM21 of Brighton & Hove City Plan Part 2.

 

Informatives:

1.         In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SS1 of the Brighton & Hove City Plan Part One the approach to making a decision on this planning application has been to apply the presumption in favour of sustainable development.  The Local Planning Authority seeks to approve planning applications which are for sustainable development where possible.

 

2.         Where possible, bee bricks should be placed in a south facing wall in a sunny location at least 1 metre above ground level and preferably adjacent to pollinator friendly plants.

 

3.         The applicant should be aware that the site is in a radon affected area. If the probability of exceeding the Action level is 3% or more in England and Wales, basic preventative measures are required in new houses, extensions, conversions and refurbishments (BRE2011).  Radon protection requirements should be agreed with Building Control.  More information on radon levels is available at  https://www.ukradon.org/information/ukmaps

 

 

2.               SITE LOCATION 

 

2.1.          The site consists of a detached two-storey residential dwelling with integral garage located on the northern side of Goldstone Crescent, north west of Hove Park. The dwelling is one of a run of nine similarly-designed detached dwellings that sit back from and slightly higher than the road and are accessed from a crescent-shaped access road linking with Woodland Avenue to the south and Goldstone Crescent to the north . The property features a two storey white uPVC bay window to the front elevation along with a hipped roof with a cat slide feature at first floor level that pitches down towards No.139 to the west. The dwelling is otherwise constructed in a mix of red brick, render and some mock tudor detailing.

 

2.2.          The site is not within a conservation area or otherwise designated and there are no heritage assets located in the vicinity of the site. 

 

3.               RELEVANT HISTORY 

None relevant.

 

 

4.               APPLICATION DESCRIPTION 

 

4.1.          The application proposes a roof extension to the front elevation at first floor level, and a single storey extension to the rear elevation. 

 

4.2.          The first-floor front roof extension would create a hipped roof extension on the western side that would replace the cat-slide roof-slope and sit adjacent to the principal front gable. It would be of a form and size similar to the roof extension already carried out at the neighbouring property directly to the west. The proposed first floor roof extension would also feature an obscure glazed window on the west facing elevation. A ground floor extension with four rooflights is proposed on the rear elevation that would be approximately 3 metres in depth, 8.3 metres in width with an eaves height of 2 metres and an overall maximum height of 3.2 metres.

 

4.3.          The application originally included a hip to gable roof extension on both sides with front rooflights and a large rear dormer however the plans have been amended and these elements of the development have been removed from the proposals. 

 

 

5.               REPRESENTATIONS 

 

5.1.          In response to publicity, responses were received from six (6) individuals, objecting to the application and raising the following issues: 

·      Poor design 

·      Inappropriate height

·      Overdevelopment

·      Overshadowing 

·      Overlooking

·      Impact on property value

 

5.2.          One objection was received from Councillor Samer Bagaeen who has since confirmed that they withdraw their objection in light of amendments made removing the proposed side and rear roof-works.

 

5.3.          Many of the objections relate to the now removed rear dormer element of the original proposal.

 

5.4.          Full details of representations received can be found online on the planning register. 

 

 

6.               CONSULTATIONS

 

6.1.          No consultation responses have been received in relation to this application.

 

 

7.               MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

 

7.1.          The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the design and appearance of the proposed extension/alterations and whether they would have a detrimental impact on neighbouring amenity. 

 

 

8.               RELEVANT POLICIES & GUIDANCE 

DM1             Housing Quality, Choice and Mix

DM18           High quality design and places

DM20           Protection of Amenity

DM21           Extensions and alterations

DM37           Green Infrastructure and Nature Conservation

DM43           Sustainable Drainage

 

Supplementary Planning Document: 

SPD09         Architectural Features

SPD11         Nature Conservation & Development

SPD12         Design Guide for Extensions and Alterations

SPD17        Urban Design Framework 

 

 

9.               CONSIDERATIONS & ASSESSMENT 

 

9.1.          The main considerations in the determination of this application relate to the impact on neighbouring properties and the impact of the front elevation extension on the character and appearance of the area. 

 

9.2.          A site visit was undertaken on 18 January 24 to assess the proposal.

 

Character and Appearance 

9.3.          The proposed roof extension to the front elevation would be similar in design and appearance to other existing extensions on neighbouring properties such as No.139 and No.129 Goldstone Crescent. The roof extension would be subservient to the principal roof and would be suitably contained within the existing roof space to facilitate a new bedroom at first floor. The extension would not appear as a dominant addition to the street-scene, assimilating well into the appearance of the host property.

 

9.4.          The proposed single storey rear extension would not be visible from the public domain so would have no impact on the street-scene or character of the area. The proposed rear extension would extend the entire width of the ground floor rear elevation with rooflights sited within the mono pitched roof and would otherwise retain a subservient appearance of acceptable design. The materials proposed would match the existing (red brick), which is recommended to be secured by condition. 

 

9.5.          The front and rear extensions are considered to be suitably designed and scaled appropriate to the character of the principal dwelling and in accordance with policy DM21 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part Two.

 

Impact on Amenity 

9.6.          With regards to the impacts upon residential amenity the proposed front roof extension would not result in a loss of privacy/overlooking with the new proposed front elevation window providing views of the driveway and road at the front of the site.

 

9.7.          The proposed western side elevation window would be obscure glazed which would be secured by condition and therefore would not result in a loss of privacy/overlooking.  The development would have some impact upon a small front-facing window and side window sited on the eastern side of the neighbouring property at 139 Goldstone Crescent. However, given the orientation of the site the impacts are not considered to cause harm sufficient to warrant refusal of the application, particularly as plans approved for 139 Goldstone Crescent show these front and side first floor windows to 139 to serve a hallway and storage. No significant harm is therefore considered to result from the proposals.

 

9.8.          The rear extension would be single storey in height, with no side windows or a raised terrace proposed resulting in no privacy or overlooking concerns. The extension would be set away from the neighbouring boundary and is not considered to be overbearing or result in a significant loss of outlook to neighbours due to its single storey nature and proximity to the existing built form. Given the scale and set back from the common boundaries the proposal is not considered to cause any significant loss of daylight or sunlight. 

 

9.9.          The impacts on neighbouring residential amenity from the front roof and ground floor rear extensions are considered to be acceptable and in accordance with policy DM20 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part Two.

 

Other Matters

9.10.       The rear extension would be constructed over grass and hardstanding so there would be no impacts of concern regarding trees, habitats or protected species. A condition is recommended requiring a bee brick to enhance the nature conservation of the site in accordance with policy DM37 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part Two.

 

9.11.       There would be no changes proposed to the access or increased impact on the public highway as the property would remain a large family dwelling. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable with regard to highways impacts.

 

9.12.       No concerns are raised in regards to the standard of accommodation proposed. The extensions are compliant with the Nationally Described Space Standards and the proposed works would provide one bedroom and otherwise improve the internal amenity space of the dwelling in accordance with policy DM1 of the Brighton and Hove City Plan Part Two.

 

9.13.       Matters such as loss of property value, structural safety, and the impact of construction works raised in objections are not material planning considerations.

 

Conclusion

9.14.       The proposed works would not have a significant impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents, and the design is considered to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the area, being similar to existing alterations made to properties in the vicinity.

 

Equalities

9.15.       During the determination of this application due regard has been given to the impact of this scheme in relation to the Equality Act 2010 in terms of the implications for those with protected characteristics namely age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation. There is no indication that those with any of these protected characteristics would be disadvantaged by this development.