AMENDMENTS/ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPECT OF THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES TO THE PLANNING TRANSPORTATION REGULATORY PANEL

PLANNING APPLICATIONS AND RELATED DEVELOPMENT CONTROL MATTERS

PART I (AMENDMENTS)

SECTION 1 : APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION 19thJune 2009

APPLICATION No:	09/57273/FUL

APPLICANT:	Mrs F Jamil

LOCATION:	178 Langworthy Road Salford M6 5PP    

PROPOSAL:	Change of use of ground floor from shop to shop for the sale of hot food together with the installation of a fume extraction system

WARD:	Langworthy

ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS:

Members’ attention is drawn to the representation section of the report where it states one letter of objection has been received. There have in fact been two letters of objection however no new issues have been raised. 

APPLICATION No:	09/57446/HH

APPLICANT:	Mr Marcel Luftig

LOCATION:	78 Northumberland Street Salford M7 4DG    

PROPOSAL:	Erection of a single storey side/rear extension

WARD:	Broughton

ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS

Details of the applicant’s personal circumstances and two letters of support have been submitted since writing this report.  

The letters of support are from the occupiers of the adjoining property (no.80 Northumberland Street) and the occupiers of the property to the rear (No. 23 Ashbourne Grove).

Both letters detail the large family of the applicants, their involvement within the community and the need for additional space due to the family extending.

The applicant has explained that the family currently consists of two adults and eight children with an additional child to be born shortly.  The family cannot currently sit together or eat together as the existing rooms are too small to accommodate all the family at one time.  In addition the applicant states that one child suffers from ADHD and the additional space would assist in his development.  It is vital that the applicant’s stay within the area due to community facilities associated with their religious beliefs and the applicant notes other large extensions that have been built within the area.

Response

The majority of the proposed extension is considered acceptable.  The element that is considered contentious is the latter 0.52m projection from the main rear elevation.  The proposed dining room area would measure a maximum of 4.5m in width with a length of 4.5m.  The dining room would be angled away from the boundary with No.46 on a 45 degree therefore reducing the projection of the extension would still allow a room with space for a dining room table that would allow the family to sit together.  As with the dining room the sitting room (which is additional to the existing lounge) would extend the room from 3.4m wide by 4.7m in length to an overall length of 8m.  The existing lounge, which would remain measures 4.7 in width by 3.7mnin length with an additional bay window.  It is considered that the proposed extension could be reduced by 0.52m to be considered as acceptable and still meet the personal circumstances of the applicants family.

APPLICATION No:	09/57454/HH

APPLICANT:	Mr Silkin

LOCATION:	4 Deanery Gardens Bury New Road Salford M7 4WT   

PROPOSAL:	Erection of a second floor rear extension and roof alterations to existing main hipped roof to form a gable roof.

WARD:	Kersal

ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS:

Details of the applicant’s personal circumstances have been submitted since writing this report.  The property and resulting property consists of the following rooms;

Ground floor
Hall, utility, kitchen lounge, dining room and succah.

The ground floor would remain unchanged by the proposed extension.

First floor
4 Bedrooms (including one box room), one bathroom and one wc.

The first floor would remain unchanged by the proposed extension.

Second floor
The extension would create three bedrooms, utility room and one en-suite (there are six beds indicated on the plans).

The applicant’s family currently consists of two adults and seven children.  The property currently has 3 ½ bedrooms.  The smallest bedroom currently has the two youngest children sleeping in it in cots, as the bedroom is not big enough for beds.

In addition the clothes washer and dryer are located within the bedrooms due to lack of space elsewhere.  The noise from these regularly disturbs the children.

Aside from the immediate family it is common for extended family to visit and sleep over.  This includes the brothers and sisters families of the applicants and his wife’s and the parent and grandparents of Mr Silkin and friends of the children.

Response

The property currently has 4 bedrooms.  These sleep seven children and two adults.  The resulting building if the extension were to be built would accommodate seven bedrooms an additional utility and en-suite.  The resulting building if the extension was built could comfortably accommodate six beds in the roof space (6 single beds are indicated on the plans) and seven beds could be accommodated within the existing first floor bedrooms.  Therefore the resulting building could accommodate at least thirteen bed spaces for a family of nine.

The majority of the proposed extension is considered acceptable.  The element that does not comply with the principles of policy HE7 of the House Extensions SPD is the proposed bedroom over the existing outrigger.  This proposed bedroom would measure 2.5m in width and 5.3m in length.  It is proposed to put three beds within this bedroom.  If the length of the bedroom were to be reduced by 1m the bedroom would comply with the principles of HE7 and could still accommodate three beds.  Given the resulting property would accommodate an additional four bed spaces than the current number of permanent residents it is considered that the proposed extension could be reduced to comply with the House Extension Supplementary Planning Document and still meet the personal circumstances of the applicants family.