Part first floor extension to existing bungalow

Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 24 August 2021 by A Caines BSc(Hons) MSc TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 1 September 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/P2935/D/21/3278395 16 Lynwood Close, Darras Hall, Ponteland NE20 9JG • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Simon Tappin against the decision of Northumberland County Council. • The application Ref 21/00928/FUL, dated 8 March 2021, was refused by notice dated 22 June 2021. • The development proposed is part first floor extension to existing bungalow. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for part first floor extension to existing bungalow at 16 Lynwood Close, Darras Hall, Ponteland NE20 9JG in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00928/FUL, dated 8 March 2021, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 257-00; 257.02 (amended 17.06.2021) Procedural Matter 2. On 20 July 2021, the Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). The revised Framework does not materially alter the national policy approach in respect of the main issues raised in this appeal and therefore no parties have been prejudiced by its publication. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 4. Lynwood Close is characterised by detached dwellings set within spacious, verdant plots. The appeal property is a bungalow, but most dwellings in the street are larger chalet-style bungalows with dormer windows, or two-storey dwellings. Many of the dwellings have clearly been extended over time in various different sizes and forms. Variety in dwelling size, shape and form is also found throughout the wider Darras Hall estate. Appeal Decision APP/P2935/D/21/3278395 2 5. Patently the two-storey height of the extension would not be subservient to the existing bungalow. Nonetheless, the extension would be located at one end of the building with its roof running perpendicular to the existing, such that once the extension is constructed, the lower and higher elements would dovetail neatly together in a proportionate and coherent t-shape form. In addition, the height of the extension would be comparative with neighbouring dwellings and it would not extend any further towards the front and side boundaries. The modern design would be bespoke to the property, but owing to the site’s secluded location at the end of the cul-de-sac, the development would not be unduly conspicuous in the street scene. 6. Overall, even though the proposal would result in a significant change in the form and appearance of the host dwelling, it would be achieved in an appropriate manner, both in respect of the existing dwelling and the established character of the surroundings. 7. I therefore conclude that the development would not harm the character or appearance of the area. Consequently, the proposal complies with saved Policy H14 of the Castle Morpeth District Local Plan (2003) and Policies PNP2 and PNP 4 of the Ponteland Neighbourhood Plan. These seek good design which respects the appearance of the property and the quality, distinctiveness and character of the area. The proposal also complies with the good design aims in paragraph 130 of the Framework. Conditions and Conclusion 8. As suggested by the Council in the appeal Questionnaire, I have imposed the standard commencement and approved plans conditions to provide certainty. 9. Subject to these conditions, and for the reasons given, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. A Caines INSPECTOR