First floor extension to form new master bedroom/ en-suite with Juliet balcony to the front elevation. Ground floor internal remodel

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 27 November 2018 by W Johnson BA (Hons) Dip TP Dip UDR MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 18 December 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/P2365/D/18/3207988 40 Black Moss Lane, Ormskirk L39 4UF  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 Mrs H Smith against the decision of West Lancashire Borough Council.  The application Ref 2018/0496/FUL, dated 7 May 2018, was refused by notice dated 12 July 2018.  The development proposed is a first floor extension to form new master bedroom/ en-suite with Juliet balcony to the front elevation. Ground floor internal remodel. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the first floor extension to form new master bedroom/en-suite with Juliet balcony to the front elevation, and ground floor internal remodel at 40 Black Moss Lane, Ormskirk L39 4UF, in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref: 2018/0496/FUL, dated 7 May 2018, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule. Procedural Matter 2. A revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published on 24 July 2018. I have had regard to the revised Framework in reaching my decision. Main Issue 3. I consider that the main issue is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of 6 Barnes Road, with particular regard to outlook. Reasons 4. The appeal property is a semi-detached house in a residential area. The host dwelling comprising brick construction at ground floor, with render above and on the gable end, with a tiled roof. The front porch and single storey side extension are then treated in stone cladding. The appeal site occupies a slightly lower level than the properties located on Barnes Road, including No 6, which results in a slight difference between the eaves heights of the properties. 5. No 6 is a similar style of property to the host dwelling, and I note the Council’s comments contained in the officer report, regarding the location of the proposed extension and its distance from No 6. It is stated that the distance of the proposed extension from the rear elevation of No 6 is approximately 10 metres. This distance is not disputed by the appellant. Appeal Decision APP/P2365/D/18/3207988 2 6. Policy GN3 of the West Lancashire Local Plan Development Plan Document 2013 (LP) requires, amongst other things, proposals for development to retain or create reasonable levels of privacy, amenity and sufficient garden/outdoor space for occupiers of the proposed and neighbouring properties. In the Council’s Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2008 (SPD) states that ‘the minimum distance between main elevations and those that do not contain primary windows of habitable rooms is 12m’. However, it also states ‘this distance could be reduced in areas of high density or where the proposal is designed or oriented in such a way to avoid the development appearing over-dominant from the neighbouring properties’. 7. During my site visit, I noted that the host dwelling and No 6 do not have a direct facing relationship, and are sited at an oblique angle to each other. Likewise, I noted that No 6 has benefitted from a two storey side extension that extends further into the rear garden than the original rear elevation of the property, which in turn on its rear elevation has a window at ground floor and a dormer style window located at first floor. On the evidence before, it is not clearly identified which element of No 6 the Council considers to be to be affected by the scheme. From my findings, I consider that as the rear windows in the side extension of No 6 are clearly closest to the appeal site, they are potentially the most likely to be affected. I have dealt with the appeal on this basis. 8. Whilst I accept that the proposal would not be set away from No 6 by 12 metres, it would be orientated in such a way to avoid the development appearing overly dominant to these neighbouring occupiers. Additionally, on the boundary between the properties mature vegetation and trees are present, which would significantly screen the proposal from the ground floor window. The scheme would be a well-designed, subordinate extension that would due to the differing building lines, and modest change in levels between the host dwelling and No 6, still allow the occupiers of No 6 the ability to look from their first floor rear dormer window past the appeal site to the fields beyond. Therefore, the site specific circumstances of the host dwelling means that the scheme would accord with the overall design aims of the SPD. 9. For all of these reasons the proposal would not create any significant harmful effects to the living conditions of the occupiers at No 6 through the loss of outlook, and therefore complies with Policy GN3 of the LP. Additionally, the proposal accords with Paragraph 127 of the Framework which requires a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. Other Matters 10. No objections have been raised by the Council in respect to any other matters, including, amongst other things, highway safety and design and appearance. I too agree with the Council and find the proposal acceptable in these matters. Conditions 11. I attach a condition specifying the approved plans, for certainty. A condition to ensure that the facing materials would match those present on the existing property has been included in the interests of the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. Additionally a condition has been imposed regarding the first floor window in the side elevation of the scheme in the interests of the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers. Appeal Decision APP/P2365/D/18/3207988 3 12. In light of advice contained in Planning Practice Guidance, for clarity, and to ensure compliance with the Guidance, I have amended some of the Council’s wording on the original conditions that I have included on this decision. Conclusion 13. For the above reasons, and having had regard to all other matters raised, the appeal is allowed. W Johnson INSPECTOR Schedule of Conditions 1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following approved plans: 086-01; 086-02 and 086-03 Rev B. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 4) Prior to the commencement of the use of the development hereby approved, unless required for purposes as an escape window, the secondary bedroom window located on the gable elevation of the first floor side extension of the dwellinghouse shall be fitted with obscure glass (Pilkington level 3 or equivalent) and be non-opening and shall remain so fitted at all times thereafter for the duration of the development. If required for escape purposes the window shall be fitted with obscure glass (Pilkington level 3 or equivalent) and shall include a restrictor mechanism to prevent the window from opening more than 50mm during normal use/non-emergency situations and shall remain so fitted at all times thereafter for the duration of the development.