Single storey garden room extension

📊

See the success rate & inspector analytics

Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.

Sign Up Free

Technical Issues Heatmap

Character & Appearance
Ecology & Biodiversity

Inspector’s Reasoning

www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate Appeal Decision Site visit made on 9 October 2018 by David Fitzsimon MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 22nd October 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/M9496/D/18/3208690 15 Lowside Close, Calver S32 3WZ  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 Alex Cairns against the decision of Peak District National Park.  The application Ref NP/DDD/0318/0255, dated 22 March 2018, was refused by notice dated 24 May 2018.  The development proposed is a single storey garden room extension. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey garden room extension at 15 Lowside Close, Calver S32 3WZ in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref NP/DDD/0318/0255, dated 22 March 2018, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 1964-02 and 1964-500. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match those of the existing dwelling. Main Issue 2. The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and its setting. Reasons 3. The appeal relates to a relatively modern bungalow style dwelling which sits within a cul-de-sac of similar architecturally unremarkable properties. The proposal seeks to erect a single storey garden room at its side. The Council has no issue with the overall scale and siting of the garden room and nor do I. The Council’s only concern is the predominance of glazing to its side elevation. 4. The Council refers to its adopted Supplementary Planning Document titled ‘The Design Guide’ (SPD). This document discusses solid to void ratios, how Appeal Decision APP/M9496/D/18/3208690 2 traditional construction techniques historically limited the widths of openings, making them vertical in proportion and relatively small, and how gables were generally left blank to ensure structural integrity. It also suggests that garden rooms are generally an alien feature being neither visually transparent nor traditionally solid and that UPVC should not be used as a finishing material for conservatories. 5. Nevertheless, the appeal relates to a modern property which already has a large picture window to the front elevation and its window frames are finished in UPVC. Although glazing would dominate the gable of the extension, it is well designed and it would add visual interest to this elevation. As I consider the extension and the design approach for the end gable to be appropriate to the context I have described, the fact that it would be visible from the public domain is not a negative factor. 6. For the above reasons, I conclude that the proposal would respond well to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and its setting. As a result, it would not conflict with the statutory duty to at least preserve the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the National Park. Nor would it conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework, policy GSP3 of the adopted Peak District National Park Core Strategy, policies LC4, LH4 of the Peak District National Park Local Plan, or the overall aims of the SPD; all of which promote good design that responds well to its surroundings. Conditions 7. In addition to the standard conditions which limit the lifespan of the planning permission and direct that the development takes place in accordance with the approved plans, the Council has suggested one other condition in the event the appeal succeeds. I agree that the external finishes of the extension should match those of the host dwelling in order to ensure a visually acceptable development. 8. In allowing the appeal, I will impose conditions accordingly. David Fitzsimon INSPECTOR
Expert Representation

Don't leave your appeal to chance.

Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.

Get Free Review How it works →