Rear extension
A single-storey rear extension has been approved at a property on Woodlands Road, Barry.
The development will replace the existing conservatory and includes three rooflights.
The extension will measure approximately 3.3 metres in height, 2.5 metres to the eaves, 4.2 metres in depth, and 8.2 metres in width.
Construction must begin within five years of the approval date and follow the approved plans.
External materials must match those of the existing property.
Biodiversity enhancement measures outlined in the Green Infrastructure Statement must be completed before the extension is occupied and maintained for the lifetime of the development.
Photographic evidence of the completed enhancements must be submitted to the council within four weeks of installation or planting.
Non-material amendment
A non-material amendment has been approved for a group of properties on Peterswell Road.
The changes involve replacing proposed pitched roofs over communal areas with insulated flat roofs.
The application forms part of a wider retrofit and refurbishment scheme.
This includes the installation of Soltherm 100mm Mineral Wool external wall insulation with Ultimate Silicone render and Deco W Brick-ID applied to the existing external walls.
The works also cover the replacement of windows and doors.
In some cases, roofs will be extended to accommodate the new insulation and achieve the required overhang.
Rear kitchen extension
Plans for a ground-floor rear kitchen extension and a rear dormer at a property on Lakeside, Barry, have been refused.
The council said the dormer’s scale, form, and prominent position would result in an unacceptable alteration to the original roof and create an incongruous addition.
It concluded that the proposal would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the Barry Marine Conservation Area.
The application also included solar panels on the front elevation.
However, the council said there was insufficient information to demonstrate that the panels would be appropriately designed to minimise their visual impact.
The absence of a Green Infrastructure Statement and biodiversity enhancements also contributed to the refusal.
