| Conditions / Reason for Refusal: |
(A)Reasons for Refusal
01
The Council considers that the proposed outbuilding by virtue of its excessive footprint, size and scale is a poor form of development and represents overdevelopment of the site. Due to its excessive size and location, it fails to take opportunities to create a good design and is not subservient to the host property. The proposal would be out of character with the grain of the surrounding area and is considered to be dominant upon the host property. As such the development is contrary to Local Plan Policies CS28 ‘Sustainable Development’ and SP55 ‘Design Principles’, as well as the Council’s SPD ‘Householder Design Guide’ and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning Practice Guidance.
02
The Council further considers that due to the footprint of the building and its size and location directly adjacent to the boundaries, it would result in an oppressive and overbearing impact upon the neighbouring properties. The proposal is therefore contrary to SP55 ‘Design Principles’, as well as the Council’s SPD ‘Householder Design Guide’ and the guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning Practice Guidance.
Informative
Enforcement action has been authorised requiring the removal of the detached outbuilding for a double garage/ store and office within a compliance period of 6 months. Appropriate action should be taken to secure the removal of the detached outbuilding for a double garage/ store and office to avoid formal enforcement action.
Positive and Proactive Statement
The applicant did not enter into any pre application discussions with the Local Planning Authority. It is not possible to support a scheme of this nature nor would any amendments make it acceptable. It was not considered to be in accordance with the principles of the National Planning Policy Framework and resulted in this refusal.
|
