Replacement of existing flat roof with dual pitched roof which will contain habitable loft space

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 28 July 2026 by A Hunter LLB (Hons) PG Dip MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 22 September 2026 Appeal Ref: 6009453 Chapel House, Chapel Lane, Wawne HU7 5XX • 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 Jess Thompson against the decision of East Riding of Yorkshire Council. • The application Ref is 26/00118/PLF. • The development proposed is the replacement of existing flat roof with dual pitched roof which will contain habitable loft space. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the replacement of existing flat roof with dual pitched roof which will contain habitable loft space at Chapel House, Chapel Lane, Wawne HU7 5XX in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 26/00118/PLF, 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: drawing no’s JT-R3-EP-GA; JT-R3-EP-SC; JT-R3-EP- EL; and T-R3-EP-SP rev.B. 3) The external materials used in the development hereby approved shall be those stated on section 10 of the application form. Preliminary Matters 2. The description of development above has been taken from the application form, as it accurately describes the proposed development and I have not been made aware of any agreement for it to be changed. 3. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was revised on 17 August 2026. Both main parties have been given the opportunity to comment on how the changes affect their respective cases, and any responses received have been taken into account in my decision. Main Issue 4. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and the immediate area, with particular regard to its scale and design. Appeal Decision 6009453 2 Reasons 5. The appeal site comprises a detached dwelling, a former methodist church that was converted into a dwelling in the late 1990’s. It has a generous setback from Ferry Road on its front side and has tall hedges on both its front and side boundaries, between it and Ferry Road, along with a tree to one side of its front garden. Chapel Lane, which is a narrow private track serving the host property and 2 no. dwellings to its rear side, runs alongside one of the appeal site’s side boundaries, between it and no.8 Ferry Road, which is a semi-detached bungalow that is setback from the road even further than the host property. To its opposite side, is no.2 Ferry Road, a semi-detached two-storey dwelling that is located a bit further forward than the appeal property. 6. The immediate area around the appeal site, has a low density of properties, which mostly have front boundary hedges, some of which are tall, and many of the nearby properties have trees in or near their front gardens. Collectively this gives a spacious character and verdant appearance to the immediate area, although the planting does mean that views of some parts of these properties are screened from the road. There is also considerable variety in the architectural style and scale of properties nearby, including modern detached and semi-detached one and two storey properties, along with older cottages, giving a distinct lack of uniformity in the scale, design and appearance of properties in this immediate area. 7. The appearance of the appeal property is unusual, particularly its front part, comprising a flat roof two storey element (hidden by a parapet wall), which is attached to a single storey pitched roof part that sits behind it. It is said to relate to its understated former methodist chapel use, and it is largely screened from public view by existing planting. Its flat roof form is not distinctive to the village, and I did not find it made a positive contribution to local character. 8. The proposed extension would make the front part of the host property taller, said to be by some 3.7 metres or so, and although it is said to be three storeys, the second-floor accommodation would be within the proposed new roof space. It would also provide it with a pitched roof that better reflected other roofs in the immediate area, thereby removing the alien flat roof form which would be a benefit to the character and appearance of the area. Its pitched roof design would also relate sympathetically to the lower pitched roof part of the building, creating a legible and cohesive design. The proposed fenestration, even at its higher level, would respect the style and position of the existing openings on the front side and harmonise with the appearance of the host property. 9. The increased scale of the proposed development would partly be screened by the existing landscaping in front of the host property and to its sides. Moreover, even without the landscaping, its increased height would add to the architectural variety and scale within the immediate area and given its setback, it would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the immediate area. 10. I also note the Council raised concerns about views of the proposed extended roof from the countryside, but they did not specify where such views would be from. My own site observations, including from the roads into and out of Wawne, did not indicate to me that the proposed development would have any harmful impacts on the countryside. Moreover, I found that it would satisfactorily assimilate into the Appeal Decision 6009453 3 built fabric of the village, and not be a prominent feature given its surrounding built context. Consequently, I cannot agree with the Council that its scale and appearance would be harmful to the character and appearance of the host property or the immediate area. 11. The Council has not raised objection to the external materials to be used on the proposed extension, and I see no reason to disagree. 12. I therefore conclude that the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the host property and the immediate area, and comply with the relevant parts of policies ENV1 and S3 of the East Riding Local Plan Update 2020 – 2039 Strategy Document Update, dated April 2025 (ERLPU) insofar as they require new development to be high quality, contribute to safeguarding and respecting the diverse character and appearance of the area, contribute to its sense of place and beauty, be of an appropriate scale, height and massing, and ensure development is commensurate with the scale role and character of the village. In addition, the proposed development would be consistent with Policy DP3 of the Framework, insofar as it seeks well-designed places that respond to their context, including their character and setting, so that they integrate with and enhance their surroundings. Conditions 13. A standard implementation condition has been imposed (1), along with a condition listing the approved plans (2), to provide certainty over what has been approved. Condition 3 is also imposed to ensure the appearance of the proposed development harmonises with the host property, the immediate area, and to accord with the external materials specified within the submission, including the different concrete roof tiles. 14. Regarding the suggested obscure glazing condition, the proposed section plan indicates that the height of the lower parts of the proposed 2 no. rooflights in either side of the roof (measured by the Council to be some 1.65 metres above the floor level), would be unlikely to have unacceptable privacy issues in respect of adjoining occupiers. In any event, such views towards no.8 to one side would be across Chapel Lane and of its front garden, to the other side views would likely be directly towards the side of no.2 Ferry Road itself. Consequently, I was not persuaded that a condition was reasonable or necessary to require these roof lights to be obscure glazed or non-opening. 15. The recommended conditions to withdraw permitted rights under both Class B and Class C (Part 1, Schedule 2 of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015) were not reasonable or necessary to protect adjoining occupiers living conditions. As conditions in respect of both Class B and C, state any new windows installed on a new wall or roof must be obscure-glazed, and non-opening unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed, which would be adequate safeguards in this case. I also did not find a condition requiring the provision of 2 no. vehicle parking spaces to be necessary, given that they are already shown on the approved plans, not understood to be at threat from the proposed development, and because there is no evidence of unacceptable parking stress in the local area. Appeal Decision 6009453 4 Conclusion 16. The proposed development accords with the development plan when taken as a whole and there are no other material considerations, including the provisions of the Framework, which outweigh this finding. For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. A Hunter INSPECTOR