For site levelling to the rear for the installation of a basement and external staircase together with a two storey front and rear extension with adjoining balcony and loft conversion
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Heritage & Conservation
Extensions
Character & Appearance
Inspector’s Reasoning
1
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 30 October 2024
by S Hartley BA(Hons) Dist.TP (Manc) DMS MRTPI MRICS
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 6 November 2024
Appeal Ref: APP/N4205/D/24/3351636
22 The Glen, Bolton, BL1 5DB
• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as
amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Mr. Zeshan Tahir against the decision of Bolton Council.
• The application reference is 18439/24.
• The development proposed is for site levelling to the rear for the installation of a
basement and external staircase together with a two storey front and rear extension
with adjoining balcony and loft conversion.
Decision
1. The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for site levelling to
the rear for the installation of a basement and external staircase together with
a two storey front and rear extension with adjoining balcony and loft
conversion at 22 The Glen, Bolton, BL1 5DB in accordance with the terms of
the application reference 18439/24, subject to the following conditions: -
i. The development hereby permitted shall not begin later than three years
from the date of this permission.
ii. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in
accordance with the following approved plans: references 001(location
plan); 004 (proposed site section); 005 (cross section); 008 (proposed site
plan); 009 (proposed basement and ground floor plan); 010 (proposed 1st
and 2nd floor plans); 011 (proposed roof plan); 012 (setting out plan); 013
(proposed front elevation); 014 and 015 (proposed side elevations) and 016
(proposed rear elevation)
iii. 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.
Procedural Matters
2. The appellant describes the proposed development as for extensions and
general re-modelling of the existing property. I have used the local authority’s
description (LPA) in the banner heading and in the decision as it more fully
describes the proposed development.
Appeal Decision APP/N4205/D/24/3351636
2
3. On 30 July 2024 the Government began consultations upon reforms to the
National Planning Policy Framework 2023 (the Framework) which closed on 24
September 2024. The reforms are draft and may be subject to change and
therefore I afford the draft changes only limited weight in the decision-making
process. As there are no proposed reforms which are pertinent to the main
issues in this appeal, it has not been necessary for me to consult the main
parties upon it.
The Main Issue
4. The main issue is whether the development preserves or enhances the
character or appearance of the Chorley New Road Conservation Area (CA).
Reasons
5. The CA is characterised as a whole by its mature woodland and trees within
which is set a suburban development of low density, mainly detached dwellings
dating from the mid nineteenth century onwards. More recent development, of
which the appeal property is one, are designed around various culs-de-sac.
6. The environment of the CA around the appeal property retains the
characteristics of this low-density development with brick detached dwellings
within a setting of mature trees.
7. The proposed development would alter the appearance of the dwelling by the
inclusion of, amongst other things, two front, double pitched gables and two
dormers. However, the footprint of the dwelling within its curtilage would
remain approximately the same and it would continue to be a two storey
property. The proposed external materials would match those of the existing
dwelling and with other properties around it.
8. I do not find that the proposed development would result in a disproportionate
or overly dominant dwelling in terms of its size or design in relation to the
original dwelling or the adjoining dwellings, nor do I find the amount of glass
that is proposed, to be excessive or inappropriate in design terms.
9. Therefore, for these reasons, I conclude that the proposed development would
preserve the character and appearance of the CA as a whole and as such,
would accord with policy OA4 of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011), policies
JP-P1 and JP-P2 of the Places For Everyone Joint Development Plan Document
For Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Tameside, Trafford
and Wigan (2024), the Council’s General Design Principles Supplementary
Document and chapter 12 of the Framework, all of which require development
to respect and protect the character and identity of the area, including the
historic environment.
Conditions
10. I have imposed the standard time condition and a condition to ensure the
development is in accordance with the approved plans in the interests of
certainty.
11. In the interests of the character and appearance of the CA, and for the
avoidance of doubt, it is necessary to impose a condition relating to the use of
external building materials.
Appeal Decision APP/N4205/D/24/3351636
3
Conclusion
12. For the reasons outlined above, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
S Hartley
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.