Small extension to provide porch and ensuite shower room to master bedroom

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 25 March 2019 by Mrs H Nicholls MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 3rd April 2019 Appeal Ref: APP/W1145/D/19/3222334 25B Glenfield Road, Bideford, Devon EX39 2LU • 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 Gordon Smith against the decision of Torridge District Council. • The application Ref 1/1072/2018/FUL, dated 2 October 2018, was refused by notice dated 4 December 2018. • The development proposed is a small extension to provide porch and ensuite shower room to master bedroom. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a small extension to provide porch and ensuite shower room to master bedroom at 25B Glenfield Road, Bideford, Devon, EX39 2LU, in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 1/1072/2018/FUL, dated 2 October 2018, 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: Location Plan, Block Plan, Ground floor as Proposed, First Floor as Proposed, Proposed Front Elevation and Proposed North Elevation. 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 dwelling. Preliminary Matters 2. The Council’s decision notice refers to the National Planning Policy Framework published in 2018. However, as policies of the Framework that are material to this case have not fundamentally changed, in reaching my decision I have had regard to the Revised National Planning Policy Framework (‘revised Framework’) published in February 2019. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. Appeal Decision APP/W1145/D/19/3222334 2 Reasons 4. Glenfield Road comprises a mix of modern housing, including semi-detached two storey dwellings, some detached bungalows and dormer-style dwellings, all of which present front elevations to the street behind front gardens of varying depths. There is also a varied palette of materials used amongst the dwellings. 5. No 25B is a semi-detached two storey dwelling which is adjoined to its handed counterpart (25A) by their single storey garages. Whilst they appear as a matching pair of dwellings within the streetscene, there are many examples of pairs of dwellings that would have originally matched but have evolved over time with extensions having been added to the sides or fronts. Due to the variety of dwellings within the streetscene, none of these aforementioned features stand out as particularly unbalanced or incongruous. 6. The proposal would widen the projecting gable section of the dwelling at both ground and first floor level. Due to its increased width, it would merge with the front bay window which extends over both storeys. The overall height of the projecting gabled section would also be marginally higher than at present, although still below the main ridge height. Otherwise, the extension would not project any further forward than it does currently and would incorporate the same materials as present in the existing dwelling. 7. The front projection is already a feature of the street and whilst its enlargement would result in the dwelling being different to its adjoining neighbour, the differences would be modest. The streetscene is already sufficiently varied to allow for capacity for modest change. As such, by virtue of its scale, the consistency in design with the existing dwelling, and the use of matching materials, the proposal would maintain the character of the dwelling and would not be visually prominent or detrimental to the streetscene. 8. In view of this main issue, the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area and it would therefore accord with Local Plan1 Policies ST04, DM04 and DM25, which require, amongst other things, that development is appropriate and sympathetic to its setting in terms of scale, density, massing, height, layout, appearance, fenestration, materials and that residential extensions shall be acceptable in terms of form, scale, setting and design. 9. The proposal would also accord with the policies in the revised Framework, which, amongst other things, require good design. Conclusion 10. For the above reasons, the appeal is allowed. Hollie Nicholls INSPECTOR 1 North Devon and Torridge Local Plan 2011 – 2031 (adopted October 2018)