Tha applicant said there were many examples of changes to the extension. He said it was an improvement and would lead to property values going up. He was aware of the effects of external regulations and had adapted it to reduce overshadowing and intrusion. The existing eaves lines had been changed and there had been removal of the gable end to the boundary with 26. This had reduced the effective height by 1.6m. There was a loss of sunlight to the rear of 26, but he had attempted to follow the guidance notes and Unitary Development Plan about windows to reduce overlooking and to make sure the building line didn’t come within one metre of the boundary.
The materials of the extension would match existing materials. There would be some effect on neighbouring properties. Any loss of amenity was regrettable, but he maintained a positive relationship with the local community. Approving the application would be a positive for his family and community.
The Chair asked for the impact on the house next door, he asked if there was a ward councillor to speak but there wasn’t. Cllr Salter said the main concern was loss of light, he had looked into the dimensions, there was little loss of light. The effect on next door was very little, however until it was built they would never know.
The Chair said the site visit had been beneficial and officers recommended it for approval. Cllr Peter Johnson proposed it be approved, seconded by Cllr Salter.
All councillors except Cllr Stuart Kelly (who abstained) voted for the application so it was approved.