Disputed loft conversion approved

A NEIGHBOUR dispute over a proposed loft conversion in Runcorn came to a head on Monday as councillors roundly backed the proposal.

Planning chiefs gave the goahead for the works to be done at ‘Jamar’ on Halton Station Road in Beechwood ward after short speeches from parties in favour and against.

The matter centred on an extension to the bungalow and conversion of the loft into habitable space, all of which would generate an 1.75m elevation of the roof ridgeline, according to a report published by Halton Borough Council.

Objections said this amounted to more than a loft conversion and claimed it would ‘double’ the area of the building resulting in a loss of privacy.

The committee dismissed the claims and refused to consider an issue relating to disputed land as such an inquiry did not fall within their remit.

Members concurred with findings of an officer’s report recommending approval for the project, in which it was stipulated that the completed property would still be single-storey home.

There were sharp words for Liberal Democrat and Heath ward councillor Chris Rowe, as Cllr Dave Thompson slated him for not turning up to the meeting despite having called it in.

Speakers at the meeting included Pat Wainwright, who lives in a nearby property and opposes the plans, and Joanne Pickstock, a relative of the applicant who said she was speaking because the applicant Matthew Pickstock and his family had been unnerved by ‘harassment and intimidation’ arising from the dispute.

Mr Wainwright said the scheme did not meet the requirements of the Town And Country Planning Act.

A report published ahead of the meeting said issues relating to an incorrect detail on a planning certificate had bene resolved since initial plans were lodged since last year.

Halton Borough Council had rejected previous proposals made in 2015 and told the applicant to redraft the designs to comply with the borough’s planning system.

Cllr Bill Woolfall, Labour, Birchfield, said claims that the certificate had been falsified were ‘defamatory’.

Cllr Thompson moved to rebut the argument the conversion would render the bungalow out of character with the area, pointing out that there are already semi-detached houses nearby.

He laid into the absent Cllr Rowe for not attending.

He said: “Can I say first of all, very substantial planning applications come to this committee and smaller applications – and this is a smaller application – are delegated to officers.

“I’m extremely disappointed that a councillor can’t even bother to be here.

“If someone has a feeling something should be on the agenda, they can come and speak. “Cllr Rowe isn’t here. “I’m very disappointed and it may be that other members share that concern.”

Speaking the following day after the meeting, Cllr Rowe said the resident who had contacted him and not asked him to speak on his behalf at the meeting.

He said: “A local resident wanted to put his case forward and hadn’t been successful in gaining the support of the ward councillors, so I thought that it would be reasonable for him to be able to address the committee, but he didn’t ask me to represent him.

“It’s an unusual set of circumstances and normally we don’t like to get involved in issues outside of the ward.”