Formation of a loft conversion including raising the height of the eaves and the ridge of the existing chalet bungalow

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 27 January 2021 by William Walton BA MSc Dip Env Law LLM CPE BVC MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 15th February 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/Y2003/D/20/3260096 19 Orchard Drive, Burton upon Stather, Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire DN15 9EF • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant full planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Mark Cole against the decision of North Lincolnshire Council. • The application Ref PA/2020/970, dated 25 May 2020, was refused by notice dated 7 August 2020. • The development proposed is the formation of a loft conversion including raising the height of the eaves and the ridge of the existing chalet bungalow. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue is whether the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the host building and the setting of other properties along Orchard Drive. Reasons 3. The appeal dwelling occupies a generous plot situated on the outside of the bend of a road within an established residential area in Burton Upon Stather. Most of the dwellings along the road are detached chalet bungalows with gardens to the front and rear. 4. The appeal dwelling is a 1.5 storey detached chalet bungalow with the shallow- pitched gable end facing the road. It includes 3 bedrooms located within the central part of the first floor. The garden includes several trees and shrubs. The plot sits slightly below the road. 5. The proposed development involves raising the height of the ridge by just over 1.0 metre (and not by around 1.8 metres as stated in the Officer’s Report). The new first floor would incorporate 4 large bedrooms, 2 family bathrooms and 1 en suite bathroom. There would be 3 new windows facing towards the front, 4 windows facing the rear and 3 skylights along each roof segment. The first- floor gable end and side elevations would be cedar timber clad. There would be no windows on the first-floor side elevations. 6. The roof would retain its readily identifiable and characteristic shallow pitched profile. Nevertheless, the upward extension of the side elevations to facilitate the introduction of a full sized first floor would transform the overall Appeal Decision APP/Y2003/D/20/3260096 2 appearance of the dwelling from that of a chalet bungalow to a conventional 2- storey detached house with a shallow pitched roof. Consequently, much of the dwelling’s original architectural quality and character would be lost. 7. The site’s slightly reduced elevation combined with the modest increase in the height of the existing dwelling means that the structure would not be detrimental to the surrounding area by virtue of its increased size. 8. However, the architectural style and design of the dwelling would be inappropriate in this location and thus set it apart from its neighbours. Whilst some of the dwellings in the road have been altered through, for example, the introduction of dormer windows, virtually all can be recognised and described as detached chalet bungalows. The 2-storey design would be out of place and the absence of any windows on the side elevations of the first floor would look highly unusual and very odd. 9. The redesigned dwelling would benefit from some vegetational screening. Furthermore, because the dwelling sits in a generous plot at a slightly lower level the effect of the scheme would be reduced to some extent. Nevertheless, the new 2-storey design would still be very noticeable to passers-by. The remodelled dwelling would stand in stark contrast to the other chalet bungalows within Orchard Drive and would be an incongruous feature and a discordant structure. 10. For the above reasons the proposed development would harm the character and the appearance of the host dwelling as well as the setting of the neighbouring properties along Orchard Drive. Consequently, the proposal would fail to accord with Policies DS1 and DS5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Plan 2003 which seek, respectively, to encourage development that would reflect or enhance the character, appearance and setting of the immediate area and to ensure that new development is sympathetic in design to its neighbours. 11. Furthermore, it would also fail to accord with Policy CS5 of the North Lincolnshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2011 which seeks to ensure that new development promotes high quality streetscapes. 12. Finally, it would fail to accord with the advice set out at Paragraphs 127b and d) and 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework that new development should be well designed and respect its surroundings. Other Matters 13. The Appellant contends that the Council’s planning officer failed to visit the site before drafting the report, that the report misstates the height of the proposed development and that officers were dilatory in responding to emails. These matters are not within the scope of this Decision Letter and should be considered in another place if considered appropriate. 14. The Appellant also contends that the development proposal could be promoted under changes introduced under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2020. These rights are subject to a need to seek determination from the Council as to whether Prior Approval is required in relation to specified impacts. This is not a matter relevant to the Council’s reasons for refusal and so is not considered within the Decision Letter. Appeal Decision APP/Y2003/D/20/3260096 3 15. The proposed development would not prejudice the living conditions of neighbouring residents. There were no objections submitted by neighbours or the parish council. These matters are of neutral importance. Conclusion 16. For the above reasons the appeal should be dismissed. William Walton INSPECTOR