Extension and four-bay garage at Hale House, Bury St Edmunds

What was proposed

A one-and-a-half-storey side extension with rooflights and a four-bay garage was proposed for the house.

“Planning permission is sought for a one and half storey side extension with rooflights and four bay garage to the front of Hale House, 152 Westley Road, Bury St Edmunds.”

“The proposed garage is four bay, matching the existing garage sat opposite, creating a symmetrical arrangement.”

Officer report

The site

The large detached house had a substantial curtilage, different land levels, an existing garage and mature protected trees screening views from the road.

“Hale House is a large, detached dwelling in the housing settlement boundary of Bury St Edmunds. The application site benefits from a substantial curtilage to the front and rear of the property and experiences a difference in levels. The dwelling sits at a substantially lower level to the street and to the immediate neighbour at 150, with the land rising to the North and East.”

“Views of the dwelling are screened from Westley Road, due to a number of mature trees situated to the front of the curtilage. Many of these trees are protected by virtue of a Tree Preservation Order.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A neighbouring objector and a ward member spoke against the application, while the architect spoke in support.

Members’ questions

Members asked about shadowing and trees; officers said a shadow diagram was unnecessary and that approved tree removals were not on the relevant boundary.

“Councillor Susan Glossop referenced the comments made regarding shadowing by the neighbouring objector and asked if a shadow diagram had been requested. In response, the Principal Planning Officer explained that shadowing was a matter of planning judgement and in respect of this proposal a shadow diagram had not been considered necessary.”

“Further questions were posed in relation to the trees referenced within the representations summarised in the report. The Principal Planning Officer confirmed that there were multiple protected trees at the front of the garden, all of which resulted in a scheme that would not be highly visible within the street scene. Furthermore, the trees that had been granted permission for removal were not on the boundary between the proposed development and the objecting neighbour.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The motion to approve was supported by eight members, opposed by two, with one abstention.

“Councillor Sara Mildmay-White proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation and inclusive of the additional condition as outlined in the presentation. This was duly seconded by Councillor Mike Chester.”

“Upon being put to the vote and with 8 voting for the motion, 2 against and with 1 abstention it was resolved that…”

Minutes

The decision

Planning permission was granted with conditions covering commencement, approved plans, construction hours and approval of external lighting details.

“Planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:”

“The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than three years from the date of this permission. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and documents, unless otherwise stated. Demolition or construction works shall not take place outside 8am to 6pm Mondays to Fridays and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays, public holidays or bank holidays. 4.”

Minutes