‘Far too large’ extension to Netherton home rejected for second time in few months

A planning application for a two-storey extension to a house in Ledbury Road, Netherton, has been refused for a second time because city councillors said it was too large.

Monday, 17th June 2019, 10:06 am
The planned extension being looked at during the meeting

The application had been refused in February because of concerns that it was too extensive and removed all but a small portion of the rear garden.

Planning officers told the applicant, Mr Younas, that he must re-consider the plans and gave him strict dimensions within which he should draw up a new application.

However, members of Peterborough City Council’s Planning & Environmental Protection Committee refused the application for a second time at their meeting last Tuesday after receiving an updated application from Mr Younas.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

Council head of development and construction Nick Harding said: “This new application is still considered to be far too large for the plot size and totally out of character with other properties in the area.

“We gave Mr Younas very clear instructions as to what he could and could not do, but once again he has determined to ignore these and the latest application is far too big. It leaves almost no rear garden at all; and it is our recommendation that members refuse the application again.”

Rafreen Qayyoum, speaking on behalf of Mr Younas, said: “The applicant is only trying his very best to provide for his ever-growing family. Since the original application his wife has had their fifth child and there is now no room at the property for everybody, and Mr Younas cannot afford to move to a bigger home.

“Mr Younas wants to keep his elderly grandmother living with the family, and it was this ‘granny annexe’ which essentially forms the bulk of the application.”

Cllr Peter Hiller said: “While I sympathise with the applicant for wanting to keep the elderly members of his family unit together, I have to point out to him that it is not for this committee to provide for the needs of his growing family – we consider planning and environmental protection issues only.

“There is nothing to stop him from selling a hugely extended property the day after the construction is completed.”

Mr Qayyoum added: “The applicant was told he must downsize his original application and that is exactly what he has done. We have made as much of a compromise with these new plans as possible and have significantly reduced the original size down to this new proposal.”

Cllr Nigel Simons pointed out: “The new government guidelines do now allow for greatly increased extensions to houses, up to as much as eight meters.”

Mr Harding said: “Yes that’s true, but only within very specific circumstances, and what Mr Younas has done is to hear ‘eight meters’ but didn’t consider the guidelines for those circumstances – and I’m afraid his application, as it stands, simply does not comply.”

Cllr Hiller added: “The sheer enormity of this proposal will have an adverse effect on every other property in the area, not the least of which to those two dwellings on either side of it. We have to refuse again.”

Following a vote, the application was refused.

Robert Alexander, Local Democracy Reporting Service