Issue - meetings

Erection of extension and alterations to detached garden room/gym to create dwelling forming annex accommodation associated with 5, School Hill, South Crosland, Huddersfield, HD4 7BY (within a Conservation Area) 5, School Hill, South Crosland, Huddersfield.

Contact officer: Lucy Taylor, Planning Services.

Ward(s) affected: Crosland Moor and Netherton.

Refuse (in line with the reasons detailed in the considered report).

The Sub Committee gave consideration to Planning Application 2023/90120 Erection of extension and alterations to detached garden room/gym to create dwelling forming annex accommodation associated with 5, School Hill, South Crosland, Huddersfield, HD4 7BY (within a Conservation Area) 5, School Hill, South Crosland, Huddersfield.

Under the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 37 the Sub Committee received representations from Robert Grieve (applicant) and Ron Berry (in support).

RESOLVED –

That the application be refused in line with the following reasons outlined in the considered report:

1. The proposed development would constitute a disproportionate addition to the original dwelling which would no longer be the dominant element in terms of size or appearance. This is inappropriate development in the Green Belt by definition. Further harm to the spatial and visual openness of the Green Belt would arise through the extension of this prominent structure on rising land encroaching towards open countryside. No very special circumstances have been demonstrated to clearly outweigh the harm of the development to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness or other harm. The development would be contrary to Policy LP57 of the Kirklees Local Plan and policies contained within Chapter 13 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. The proposed development by reason of its scale, siting and design would be neither subservient to nor harmonise with the host dwelling and would appear visually jarring in the wider streetscene. This would cause detrimental harm to the visual amenities of the host dwelling and character and appearance of the area. This is contrary to policies LP24 (a and c) and LP57(d) of the Kirklees Local Plan, Principles 1 and 2 of the House Extensions and Alterations SPD and policies contained within Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. The proposed extension, by reason of its siting, scale and external appearance, would fail to preserve the character or appearance of the South Crosland Conservation Area. The harm is considered to be less than substantial harm, however, as required by paragraph 199 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), great weight has been given to that harm in assessing the impact of the proposed development. Public benefits have not been demonstrated that would outweigh the harm caused in this case. The development would therefore be contrary to the Council’s duties under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Policies LP24 and LP35 of the Kirklees Local Plan and Chapter 16 of the NPPF.

A Recorded Vote was taken in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 42 (5) as follows:

For: Councillors: Addy, Paola Davies, E Firth, Lee-Richards, Marchington, McGrath, Sokhal and Ullah (8 votes)

Against: Councillors Anwar, Homewood, McGuin and Safdar (4 votes)

Abstained: Councillor Bellamy