## Delegated Item Report Full  Planning  Permission  For  Single  Storey  Extensions  To  Well  View, Wardlow

Planning Case Officer:  SC
P File No:  11757
Authorised by:  JK
NP Number:  DDD08140823
Date of Report:  30/9/2014 National Guidance:
NPPF - Requiring good design

Core Strategy:
GSP1, 2, 3, DS1
Local Plan Codes:
LC4, LC5, LH4, LT11

## List Of Background Papers (Not Previously Published) Nil Human Rights

Any human rights issues have been considered and addressed in the preparation of this report.

## Report: Site And Surroundings

Well View is a modern non-traditional bungalow situated in a 'backland' position to the west of the main road through Wardlow.  Access is gained along an unmade track off the main street. The property lies within the village Conservation Area.  

## Proposal

Permission is being sought to extend the property by infilling the space between the main dwelling and the existing detached garage, with a single storey pitched roof extension, in addition to enlarging the footprint of the existing garage.    

## Key Issues

Scale, design and external appearance and potential impact on the village conservation area.

## History

2004 - (NP/DDD/0304/0260) - Extension to dwelling - Approved.
2014 - (NP/DDD/0214/0217)  - Single storey extension - The Authority's Officers assessed the proposal and offered advice on a scheme to improve the design, that if accepted would have ensured that the development followed  guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and the Development Plan Policies of the Authority. The applicant/agent felt unable to agree to such advice/amendments at this stage and wished the application determined as submitted.  The scheme was subsequently refused on scale and design grounds.

## Policy Core Strategy

GSP3, requires that particular attention is paid to the impact on the character and setting of buildings and that the design is in accord with the Authority's Design Guide and development is appropriate to the character and appearance of the National Park L3, Is particularly relevant as it deals with Cultural heritage Assets. It explains that development must conserve and where appropriate enhance or reveal the significance of historic assets and their setting. Other than in exceptional circumstances development will not be permitted where it is likely to cause harm to the significance of any cultural heritage asset or its setting.

## Local Plan

LH4, extensions and alterations to dwellings will be permitted provided that the proposal does not detract  from  the  character,  appearance  or  amenity  of  the  original  building,  its  setting  or neighbouring buildings. Dominate the original dwelling where it is of architectural, historic or vernacular merit amount to the creation of a separate dwelling or an annexe that could be used as a separate dwelling LC4, clearly states, that where  development is acceptable  in principle, it will be  permitted provided that its detailed treatment is of a high standard that respects, conserves and where possible it enhances the landscape, built environment and other valued characteristics of the area, and the degree to which design details, materials and finishes reflect or complement the style and traditions of local buildings LC5, states that applications for development in a Conservation Area, or for development that affects  it's  setting  or  important  views  into  or  out  of  the  area,  should  assess  and  clearly demonstrate how the  existing  character  and  appearance  of the Conservation  Area  will  be preserved and, where possible, enhanced. LT11 states, the design and number of parking spaces associated with residential development, including any communal residential parking, must respect the valued characteristics of the area, particularly in Conservation Areas. Supplementary Planning Guidance within the 1987 and 2007 Design Guides.

## Comment Principle

The site lies within a named settlement (as indicated in Core Strategy Policy DS1), where policy supports in principle to extending an existing dwelling, subject to satisfactory scale, design and external appearance.  

## Scale & Design

One of the objectives of Development Plan policy is to ensure that extensions respect the scale and character of the dwelling, and proposals are not of such a scale and design that the appearance of the property and its surroundings are harmed. Policy LH4 in particular allows such extensions, the pretext indicating that, in general, extensions amounting to about 25% of the original floorspace of the dwelling are likely to be acceptable. Further advice on this issue is provided in the 2007 Design Guide where it states, 'Extensions that are limited to less than 25% of the original building are more likely to be approved'. The original floorspace of the dwelling, (including the garage) is approx. 141 square metres.  The proposed extensions (41m2 of additional floorspace) including a previously approved extension (55m2 of additional floorspace) amounts to an overall floor area of approx. 96 square metres, amounting to approx. 67% increase over the original floorspace of the dwelling.   In this instance the  new  extensions  including  the  previously  approved  extension  cumulatively  exceed  the recommended guidelines. The current resubmission addresses previous concerns over the design, particularly where the ridgeline gave the building an over long appearance.  In the current (re-submitted) scheme, this has been addressed, by retaining the existing ridge orientation of the garage and running the ridge of the infill extension opposite to the main building and the garage, thus appearing to break up the continuous/overlong appearance of the dwelling, (although the % increase remains the same as before). In this case however, whilst the % increase is significantly more than guide, the building is sited more than 30m back from the main road and is barely visible due to its orientation.  In the context of the site, it is considered on balance, that the proposed extensions would not appear overly disproportionate in scale and design to the existing property.      

## Other Issues

The Highway Authority has no objections, subject to applicant maintaining 3no. Off-street parking spaces.  In this case, aside from the two proposed garage spaces being maintained, there is ample provision for parking and manoeuvring within the site. The nearest dwelling 'Well Lane End' is situated approx 10m to the east of the development and is considered not be affected by the development, although part of the garden boundary is shared with Well View.   

## Conclusion

It is considered that on balance, the proposed extensions are of an acceptable scale and appearance in relation to the existing property will have no adverse impact on nearby residential amenity nor the character and appearance of the conservation area, whilst maintaining ample provision for parking and manoeuvring.   Consequently, the scheme is considered to accord with advice  in  the  NPPF,  Development  Plan  Policies  and  adopted  Design  Guidance,  therefore recommended for approval, subject to appropriate conditions.

## Environmental Management Measures

No new measures have been introduced; however, the agent has stated that the new extensions will help improve thermal performance of the building.  

## Consultation:

Highways - No objections subject to applicant maintaining 3no. Off-street parking spaces. The Parish Council comment that the proposed study window/door in the infill extension should be  frosted  and  the  boundary  walls  between  the  properties  not  encroached  upon  by  the development.  In this case, whilst the Parish comments are noted, it is considered no amenity will be compromised by not obscuring the glazing to the study window/door, as the window/door is set back approx 2m from the shared garden boundaries, which consist of a combination of wall and mature hedging.  Regarding the perceived encroachment on the boundary walls. The extensions will not encroach anywhere near the boundary, therefore considered will remain unaffected by the development.

## Officer Recommendation:

Approve subject to the following conditions: Standard 3 year time limit Submitted plans Design and materials Maintain garage space