Planning – Application Comments

I was recently made aware of the above planning application for a large, 2 storey extension to the rear of my neightbur's property, which is attached to mine (40 Downfield Avenue where i have resided for the last 28 years). I had no prior conversation with my neighbour regarding their intention to extend until i was informed that a letter associated with the neighb9our consultation scheme would be delivered to me sometime soon. I have since visited the Council's website to view the proposed plans online, and whilst i respect the wishes of my neighbour to extend their property, i am somewhat concerned by the size, scale and dominance of the proposed development and its impact on neighbouring properties, primarily my own. Therefore, i would like to make the following objections in accordance with the neighbour consultation scheme, based upon the following.
1. Dimensions - to the rear of 38 Downfield Avenue, there is currently a single storey glazed conservatory, approximately 2.78 metres in length which is to be demolished. The planning application is for a 2 storey extension of 4.1 metres in length, 4.27m wide (full width of the existing property) and 6.27 metres high. The original length of this type of 2 bedroom property is 7.35 metres (constituting an increase in length of 55.8%). This will be once of the largest 2 storey extensions attached to any property on the Ings Bridge Estate. By virtue of its height, length and separation distance, i feel that the structure will have an overbearing and over dominant impact on my property, giving rise to a sense of enclosure. As a result the outdoor residential amenity and subsequent enjoyment of my property will be detrimentally affected. In addition to the above, i feel that the first floor bedroom window on the rear west elevation, being 4.1 metres forward from the property rear wall would convey a degree of overlooking on to the more private areas of my garden, resulting in some loss of privacy.
2. Boundary Proximity - The proposed extension is to take up the full existing width of the property, and as a result will lie on, or very near to the boundary with my property. Therefore, the south side elevation wall will sit very close to the nearest of my kitchen windows (approximately 1.25 metres from the window mid-point) and also to the rear bedroom window (approximately 1.70 metres from the window mid-point). The promixity of the south side elevation would consequently result in a severe loss of outlook from these windows and some loss of light, amenities enjoyed by ourselves over the last 28 years. As the proposed extension will run parallel to my garage (sited alone the south side of my garden) i feel that a 'tunnelling' effect and a 'hemming in' of the rear of my house will be created, exacerbating a sense of overbearing and enclosure (see Figure 1, below showing the present layout at the rear of 38 and 40 Downfield Avenue).
3. Precedent - In Hull City Council's supplementary planning document, SPD 1, 'Policy 22' states 'House extensions should be designed to minimize their impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers and the surrounding area'. Perhaps the two storey extension attached to a nearby, two bedroom property on adjacent Alloa Close is an example of this. This extension appears to be quite similar in design the proposed extension at number 38, but it is somewhat smaller in width and length. As a result, it appears to be less obtrusive and overbearing to neighbouring property, and perhaps more in keeping with the scale, style and character of the area.
I understand that a site visit is included as part of the planning application process. Please, by all means, feel free to view the proposed development site from my property if deemed necessary. The rear garden has open access and is accessible via the bottom of my driveway. Thank you for taking the time to read the above. I do hope yu will take my concerns into account when considering this planning application.