Agenda item

The South Area Principal Planner presented the report, with the Listed Building report considered before the Planning report, and outlined the reasons for refusal as detailed in the report.  The current proposal follows on from recently refused applications for an extension to the rear of the property.  This was a more lightweight structure but still had a significant impact on the rear of the Listed Building.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme.

•         Jon Imber

The following points were discussed by Members:

•         Potential impact on a Right of Way adjacent to the site, which was confirmed a significant distance away from the site rather than along the boundary.

•         Glazed additions could be acceptable on a Listed Building in principle and in some instances were historic.  The position and design on this proposal would impact the Listed Building, covering a section of the property to the height of two storeys and wrapping around different phases of its development.

•         The proposed glazing would cover some of the windows on the existing building.  Some were a result of the 1925 alterations and were of architectural interest.  One of the windows to be removed under the proposals was original to the building.

A motion to refuse the application was proposed and seconded, put the vote and carried.

RESOLVED:

RECOMMENDATION:

That the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.      By virtue of the poor incongruous design, inappropriate scale and massing, and harm to and loss of historic fabric the development would fail to conserve the significance of the listed building and its setting and the arising harm would not be outweighed by public benefits, contrary to Core Strategy policies GSP1, GSP3 and L3, Development Management policies DMC3, DMC5, DMC7, DMC8, DMH7 and the NPPF.