REPORT Planning Application No: 63/2008/8288 7 Day Notice: Yes 1. Site Description 1.1 The application site comprises a semi-detached property located at 38 Regent Drive, Skipton which has a slate roof and rendered/spar dashed walls. The property is situated on a residential street characterised by similar properties many of which have been extended. The house has an attached garage to the side which is linked to a car port on the neighbouring property at no.40. 1.2 The site is within the Development Limit of Skipton as defined in the local plan. 2. Proposal 2.1 It is proposed to construct a first floor extension over the existing garage to the side of the house which would be stepped back from the front elevation by 0.9m and would feature a hipped roof with a ridge 0.5m below the existing. In addition it is proposed to provide an en-suite at first floor to the rear of the side extension by creating a small extension projecting 1.9m and 2.9m in width with a shallow hipped roof giving an overall height to the ridge of 6.3m. The proposals also include a flat roofed full width single storey extension to the rear measuring 7.8m x 3.5m and 2.9m in height. 2.2 It is proposed 3. Planning History 3.1 No recent planning history 4. Planning Policy Background 4.1 H2, Appendix F. 5. Parish/Town Council Comments 5.1 Skipton Town Council – No objection. 6. Consultations 6.1 Skipton Civic Society – No comment. 7. Representations 7.1 Two letters received objecting to proposal for the following reasons: Houses on Regent Drive have been extended over period of time and road is now beginning to look like an estate of townhouses or street houses. People should buy larger properties if they want big houses with en-suite bathrooms. Extension will disrupt view over Skipton Moor to house opposite. Extension will decrease value of house opposite. Garage conversions result in increased on road parking. 8. Summary of Principal Planning Issues 8.1 Design/scale and visual impact, impact upon amenity. 9. Analysis 9.1 Design/scale and visual impact: The overall scale and design of the proposed extensions are acceptable and would remain subordinate to the main house whilst reflecting the key characteristics of the property such as the fenestration and roof design. The first floor would incorporate a setback and lower ridge to overcome the possibility of terracing in accordance with Appendix F of the local plan. The rear extensions would remain unseen from the periphery of the site other than the ensuite extension which would only have a minimal impact viewed from the gap between the site and the neighbouring property. 9.2 It is proposed to incorporate matching materials throughout and it is considered the proposal is acceptable in terms of design, scale and visual impact. 9.3 Impact upon amenity: The rear extension would be contained to either side by an extension and an outbuilding to the neighbouring properties and therefore no loss of amenity would arise from this element of the proposals. 9.4 The first floor side extension would only directly impact upon the adjacent property at no. 40 to the east of the site. The extension would lie on the boundary approximately 3m from the side elevation of no. 40 which has a glass door and a widow at ground floor and a first floor obscure glazed landing window facing the applicant’s property. The proposed extensions would reduce some of the light to these openings but not to a sufficient extent to justify refusal of planning permission. There would be no loss of outlook to the door/windows and no significant visual impact would arise from the en-suite projection which would be obscured from view to an extent from the neighbouring property by their car port and outbuilding. 9.5 Objections have been received from the occupier of the property at 31 Regent Drive which is located opposite. The only direct impact which would arise would be the partial loss of a view through the gap between the applicants property and the neighbouring house. This would not be sufficient to justify a refusal of planning permission and the other issues, which are summarised above, are not relevant to consideration of this proposal. 9.6 It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in terms of impact upon amenity. 10. Recommendation 10.1 That planning permission is granted. 11. Summary of conditions 11.1 Std time condition and reason. 11.2 All external materials shall match in colour, form and texture those on the existing building. 11.3 Reason: In the interests of visual amenity. 11.4 Informative: This permission refers only to that required under the Town and Country Planning Acts and does not give permission to the developer to encroach onto land outside of their control for the construction of this extension. 12. Reasons for approval/refusal 12.1 The proposed extensions are of an appropriate scale and design and will not adversely impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties to any significant extent and thereby comply with the requirements of saved policy H20 and Appendix F of the Craven District Council (Outside the Yorkshire Dales National Park) Local Plan.