Issue - meetings

Demolition of existing shed, storages and garage; construction of two-storey side extension and single-storey rear and extension; loft conversion including rear dormer; construction of replacement garage; solar panels and heat pump at 62 Station Road, Kings Langley.

Recommendation: that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

The application was for demolition of existing shed, storages and garage; construction of two-storey side extension and single-storey rear and extension; loft conversion including rear dormer; construction of replacement garage; solar panels and heat pump at 62 Station Road, Kings Langley.

Parish Councillor Jon Tankard joined the meeting.

The Planning Officer reported that following consultation, the views of the Conservation Officer had now been received.  The Conservation Officer considered that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the setting of the listed cottages which were located further down the road, or their special interest.

The Planning Officer also reported that reference to Toms Lane at paragraph 7.3.7 of the report had been included in error and should be omitted.  The impact of the proposal on neighbours was assessed in full in the remaining paragraphs of section 7.3.

Finally, the Planning Officer reported that officers had undertaken a site visit earlier in the day to confirm the site’s status.  This had confirmed that a rear dormer window and front solar panels had been installed at the site under permitted development.

A local resident spoke against the application.

The applicant spoke in favour of the application.

Parish Councillor Jon Tankard (Abbots Langley Parish Council) spoke on the application.

Points raised by speakers against the proposal included: the applicant had obtained change of use permission for a 6-bedroom HMO under permitted development rights, but if the application were to be approved it may result in a larger HMO at the property in the future; there was insufficient parking; the extension and garage would leave little outside amenity space; the proposal represented over-development of the site and was out of character; the extension would reduce visibility at the turning into Egg Farm Lane, with associated safety implications; use of the property as an HMO would result in additional traffic movements, noise, refuse, and infrastructure pressures which would impact on neighbours and the character of the area; there would be a harmful impact to the setting of the listed cottages on Station Road and a likelihood of cars being parked across their frontage; and there was a lack of a detailed heritage assessment.

Points raised by the speaker in favour of the proposal included: the operation of the property as a small HMO had already been granted consent and was lawful; a significant proportion of the proposed work was permitted under a separate Certificate of Lawfulness; the proposal was designed to be an example of high-end, eco-friendly and energy efficient housing for young professionals, addressing a local need and was of high quality design; and the extension was designed to be a sympathetic addition to the property and the character of the surrounding area.

In response to the points raised by speakers, the Planning Officer reported that the application had been assessed as a householder development and not as a development for an HMO.  Regard had been given, in considering the acceptability of the scheme, to the fact that a lawful development certificate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 134