Issue - meetings

This application seeks full planning permission for the variation of Condition 3 (Windows) pursuant to planning permission 94/234/8 to include alterations first floor fenestration contained within the north and south elevations of the dwelling.

Condition 3 of planning permission 94/234/8 stated the following:

The new windows in the North and South upper side elevations shall be installed as fixed light, non-opening windows with the upper fanlights only hinged. These windows shall be wholly glazed in obscure glass and these requirements shall be incorporated as part of the works when constructed. Thereafter these upper side windows shall be permanently retained and maintained as such, for so long as they are required to remain.

Reason: In the interests of the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties and the occupier of the property the subject of this permission.

Recommendation: That condition 3 (Windows) be VARIED and that PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED.

Lauren Edwards, Senior Planning Officer advised that there was no update on the application.

  Mr. Knight spoke against the application.

In response to questions raised by Members of the Committee regarding the obscure glazing of the windows in question, the officer clarified that when the applicant originally replaced the windows, shown on the images, they were both fitted with clear glass with top opening windows. Upon the commencement of an enforcement investigation, the applicant changed the bottom panes to obscure glaze, but the top panes remained clear glazed.

The officer confirmed that, for reasons set out in the report, it is considered acceptable to solely have the bottom half of the windows obscured.

The officer proceeded to demonstrate to the Committee the height of the locking mechanism of the top opening of the window, being at 1.9 meters, and the perspective from which the photographs of the window were taken. The first photograph taken at eye level of the officer with a height of 1.72 meters, and the second photograph, which was taken by the officer above her head.

Members found the demonstration of the officer regarding the viewing perspective from a window, highlighting the difference in perception when standing at different heights very helpful.

The officer clarified that the second window, at ground floor level, does also breach the condition as both panes are clear glazed. However, it overlooks the frontage of the neighbouring property. Therefore, the officer is of the view that it is acceptable to be fully clear glazed. The first floor window on the other side of the property is effectively compliant with the original condition, save for the fact that the top fanlight is clear glazed. Otherwise, its size, proportion and sighting are in accordance with the condition. The only part that breaches the condition is the clear glazed top pane.

Councillor Sara Bedford moved, seconded by Councillor Harry Davies that Condition 3 (Windows) be VARIED and that PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED.

On being put to the Committee the motion was declared CARRIED by the Chair, the voting being by general assent.