Alterations and additions to an existing 1920’s timber framed bungalow/chalet

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 9 January 2019 by F Rafiq BSc (Hons), MCD, MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 January 2019 Appeal Ref: APP/M9496/D/18/3213351 Badgers Wood, Unnamed from 10901020 Northwards To Entrance of Valve House, Upper Padley, Grindleford, S32 2JA  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 & Mrs D A Gardner against the decision of Peak District National Park Authority.  The application Ref NP/DDD/0518/0446 dated 22 May 2018 was refused by notice dated 18 July 2018.  The development proposed is alterations and additions to an existing 1920’s timber framed bungalow/chalet. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for alterations and additions to an existing 1920’s timber framed bungalow/chalet at Badgers Wood, Unnamed from 10901020 Northwards To Entrance of Valve House, Upper Padley, Grindleford, S32 2JA in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref NP/DDD/0518/0446 dated 22 May 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: BW PROP 01_AP2018. 3) No development shall commence until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved samples. Procedural Matter 2. In the interests of conciseness, I have utilised the description of development from the decision notice. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host property and on the area, having regard to the location of the site within the Peak District National Park. Appeal Decision APP/M9496/D/18/3213351 2 Reasons 4. The appeal site is a bungalow located amongst a dispersed group of properties in Upper Padley. It sits on a sloping site, with the rear garden sloping away to the south. Much of the area surrounding the appeal site is woodland, which provide glimpses of buildings and gives the area a distinctly verdant, rural character. 5. The statutory purposes of a National Park designation are to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area, and to promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of its special qualities by the public. The National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) also states that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty within National Parks, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. 6. The proposal seeks an extension to the south of the existing dwelling, which would extend over ground and lower ground floor levels. It would take the form of a linked extension, where a flat roof, largely glazed element of the development would join the stood off element of the proposal with the existing dwelling. I note the sizable increase of the existing dwelling arising from the proposed extension, which the Authority state would exceed that set out in the Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (Design Guide SPD). Although it would be a two storey proposal that would alter the form of the current single storey bungalow, the extension would be set away from both end elevations of the existing dwelling, with the lower ground floor being set partly below the natural ground level. As such, I consider that despite the size of the development, it would have a subservient appearance and allow the existing property to remain the dominant element. 7. The existing dwelling is a broadly rectangular building and is finished in render with stone detailing. I note this gives it a simple appearance and it sits neatly on the site. The proposal does, however, seek to utilise the site’s changing levels with its split level design. The development does seek to incorporate features not found on the existing dwelling, such as the bay window and the mainly glazed link element of the proposal. My attention has also been drawn to the Detailed Design Guide Note: Alterations & Extensions to Residential Properties Supplementary Planning Document (Alterations & Extensions SPD), which states the local vernacular tradition is of simple building shapes and that flat roofs are rarely appropriate. However, the Authority do acknowledge that the appeal bungalow is not of a design which is traditional in the Peak District. I therefore consider the proposal, with its appearance of one of a subsidiary building linked to the existing dwelling, to provide an appropriate contemporary design that would differentiate the existing dwelling from the proposed extension. This includes the larger elements of glazing, but I have no reason to find that the different parts of the proposal would result in a poor articulation. Rather, the use of modern materials alongside the traditional natural stone, would help assimilate the development and provide a complementary relationship between the existing and proposed. 8. Given the design of the proposed extension, and the location of the site with surrounding tree coverage, I find there would be no detrimental visual impact upon the landscape. I therefore conclude that the development would not have Appeal Decision APP/M9496/D/18/3213351 3 a materially harmful effect on the character and appearance of the host property or on the scenic beauty of the Peak District National Park. It would not therefore conflict with Policies GSP1, GSP2 and GSP3 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document or Policies LC4 and LH4 of the Peak District National Park Local Plan, which seek, amongst other matters, development to respect and conserve all valued characteristics of the site including the scale of development being appropriate to the character and appearance of the National Park. Although the proposal may be contrary to certain specific guidance within the Design Guide and Alterations & Extensions SPD’s, I conclude that the proposal would not conflict with their underlying aims of ensuring that the valued characteristics of the Peak District are conserved and enhanced. There would also be no conflict with the Paragraph 172 of the Framework. Other Matter 9. Reference has been made to other planning approvals granted by the Authority. Although some details have been provided, I have not been aware of the full circumstances. I can however confirm that I have determined this appeal on its own merits. Conclusion 10. For the reasons given above and having taken into account all other matters raised, including reference to pre-application discussions as well as alternative proposals, I conclude the appeal should be allowed. Conditions 11. The Authority have suggested a number of conditions. I consider the standard implementation condition and a condition for the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans to be necessary for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. I will also impose a condition in relation to external material samples, but for these to be submitted for approval rather than to match the existing building, in the interests of the character and appearance of the host property and area. F Rafiq INSPECTOR