| Informative Notes: | | 1
)The application site relates to a two-storey, detached dwelling located to the northern side of Braggs Lane in Wrestlingworth. The dwelling is constructed of facing brickwork with brown horizontal timber cladding to the first floor front elevation of the building, a concrete interlocking tile pitched roof and white uPVC fenestration. There is a conservatory to the western side of the building. There is a hardstanding parking area to the front of the building and an integral single garage. The site is adjacent to the dwellings of 9 Braggs Lane to the west and Holly Tree House to the east. To the north is the dwelling known as 88 High Street, which is a Grade II listed building, however, the application property is not considered to be within its setting. The site also lies within an area of archaeological potential (HER17167).
Planning permission is sought for two storey side and front extensions, the replacement of the existing mono pitched roof with a dual pitched roof, the addition of solar panels to the garage roof and EV charging point to the side of the garage, the addition of two velux rooflights within the existing rear elevation and other fenestration alterations and change of external materials.
The proposal involves various extensions and external alterations to the extent that the proposal is considered to appear as the remodelling of the existing dwelling. It is considered that the existing property is not of any particular architectural merit and whilst set at the end of a row of three properties that appear to have been constructed together and are of similar design, the uniformity of this row of properties has been eroded slightly through extensions and alterations over time and the loss of the distinctive mono pitched roof in favour of a dual pitched roof of more conventional design is not considered to result in a harmful visual impact. The two-storey front extension would include large areas of glazing and would be constructed of materials that would contrast with the rest of the building. Front extensions of this design are not found elsewhere within the surrounding street scene, however, it is not considered that this front extension would unduly dominate the frontage of the dwelling nor unbalance the proportions of the dwelling and would not appear unacceptably prominent within the surrounding street scene. The two storey side extension above the existing conservatory would not be set down from the main roof ridge nor set back from the front elevation of the building which is encouraged within the design principles of the Design Guide to create a subservient relationship to the main building. However, in this instance, given that the building as a whole is proposed to be remodelled and roof form altered, and given the shallow pitch of the proposed roof, it is considered that it would be difficult for the extension to be provided with a degree of subservience to the rest of the building in a sympathetic manner. As such, in this case, this element of the proposal is considered have an acceptable visual impact. Given the different material palette found within the surrounding area, it is not considered that the alterations to the materials, including the timber vertical weatherboarding, slate tile roof and dark fenestration would have a harmful visual impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding street scene. The proposal also includes the installation of a solar panel array above the existing front garage roof, and whilst these are no found on surrounding properties, these would not be considered to appear unduly prominent and would have an acceptable visual impact. The proposal also includes the installation of an EV charger and whilst it is stated in the proposal description that this charger would be installed to the side of the building and its position has been shown on the proposed Block Plan, no detailed plans of this element of the proposal have been provided. However, given the recent changes to permitted development rights for domestic EV chargers, it is considered likely that these works would constitute permitted development and so it is not considered appropriate to require further details of the EV charger by condition. It is noted that 88 High Street to the rear of the site is a Grade II listed building and Toad Hall to the southern side of Braggs Lane is identified in the Neighbourhood Plan as a non-designated heritage asset, however, the building is not considered to be within the setting of these heritage assets and therefore the proposal would not impact their character and significance.
The two-storey front extension would measure approximately 3.7m in width, 2.1m in depth and 6.15m in height. Given its modest projection beyond the front elevation of the existing property and that it would be set away from the boundaries of 9 Braggs Lane and Holly Tree House by 7.3m and 10.3m respectively, it is not considered that this two-storey front extension would give rise to any harmful loss of light or overbearing impact for occupiers of these adjacent two properties. The two-storey side extension is proposed to be positioned to the western side of the dwelling and would replace the existing conservatory, bringing two-storey built form closer to neighbouring 9 Braggs Lane to the west. However, there are no windows within the side elevation of 9 Braggs Lane directly opposite the proposed side extension, other than a small window serving a W/C. Given this, the side extension is not considered to result in any harmful loss of light for occupiers of neighbouring 9 Braggs Lane and given that the side extension would be set off the shared boundary by approximately 1.3m and would not project beyond the existing front or rear building line of this neighbouring property, it is not considered that the side extension would result in any harmful overbearing impact. The change from a mono pitched roof to dual pitched roof would change the massing of the roof, however the roof ridge would be lower than the existing roof and it is not considered that these changes to the roof form would materially impact neighbours in terms of resulting in any harmful loss of light or overbearing impact. All other neighbouring properties are considered to be set a sufficient distance away so as to not be adversely affected by any loss of light or overbearing impact.
The proposal includes the installation of two new windows and a door within the ground floor eastern side elevation of the dwelling serving a study, utility room and garage. Given that these windows would not serve habitable spaces and that there is a boundary wall with fencing screening views across to neighbouring Holly Tree House, it is not considered that any harmful overlooking would arise for occupiers of this neighbouring property from these windows. Within the first floor side elevation of the two-storey side extension, there is proposed to be a window which would face towards 9 Braggs Lane to the west. However, this window would serve an en-suite bathroom which is not a habitable space and is proposed to be obscure-glazed. There are no first floor windows within the side elevation of this neighbouring property opposite the window and so no harmful overlooking would occur. Within the rear elevation, there would be new bi-fold doors within the ground floor, however, these would be replacing existing openings and views across towards the private amenity spaces of adjacent properties would be screened by existing boundary treatment between gardens. Two rooflights are also proposed to be installed within the existing rear roof above the lounge, however, given the angle and position of these rooflights they would not result in direct views towards any neighbouring properties. Within the first floor rear elevation, there are proposed to be four new windows installed which would all serve bedrooms. Given the separation distance of over 35m to 88 High Street to the rear of the site and screening provided by the intervening trees, it is not considered that these additional windows would result in any harmful overlooking of this neighbour to the rear. Whilst there would be some views of parts of the rear garden areas of both adjacent properties (9 Braggs Lane and Holly Tree House) this is a usual relationship that would exist between two-storey properties set within a similar building line and so would not represent any harmful overlooking. The proposal also includes various alterations to openings within the ground and first floor of the front elevation of the building, however, considering the separation distances of over 27m to the neighbouring properties opposite (6, 8 and 10 Braggs Lane), it is not considered that any harmful overlooking would arise. Whilst some views of the front driveway areas and front gardens of adjacent 9 Braggs Lane and Holly Tree House may be achieved, these are not considered to form private amenity spaces and so would not result in any undue loss of privacy. All other neighbouring properties are considered to be set a sufficient distance away so as to not be adversely affected by any overlooking or experience a harmful loss of privacy.
The proposal initially sought to alter and enlarge the hardstanding parking area to the front of the property and also included the installation of 1.2m high automated gates to the front of the driveway. The plans originally submitted showed the red line site boundary going up to the carriageway edge. However, along Braggs Lane the public highway not only includes the carriageway itself but also a section of land to either side of it and so part of the grass verge and hardstanding area within the site lies within the public highway. Given that this land had been included within the red line boundary of the site and works to alter the hardstanding area were proposed to take place within this land and the appropriate notice had not been served on the Highway Authority, the plans have since been amended to remove this area from the red line site boundary and no development would take place within the public highway land. Also, the Highway Officer had raised that the gates shown on the original plans would not be acceptable as there is a requirement for gates to be set back 5.0m from the public highway to avoid obstruction to road users when opening and closing gates. Given this, the gates have been omitted from the proposed plans and the proposal description amended accordingly.
The proposed extensions would result in an increase in the number of bedrooms within the property from 4no to 5no. As set out in the Parking Standards SPD, the current required parking provision for a five-bedroom dwelling is 4no off-road parking spaces measuring 2.5m x 5.0m, unless abutting a solid structure or planting which would require an additional 1.0m margin. The Highway Officer notes that the existing dwelling has 2no off-street parking spaces, which is below the required 3no parking spaces for a four-bedroom property. The hardstanding parking area within the site is proposed to be enlarged to accommodate at least 3no vehicles. In recognition of the current level of parking for the existing property and that only one bedroom would be added and an additional parking space is being proposed, the Highway Officer is satisfied with the overall parking provision and has raised no objection accordingly. In any case, whilst only 3no parking spaces are shown, it is noted that 4.5.2 of the Parking Standards SPD states that the first two parking spaces must be provided within the site and the other parking spaces may be provided as accessible land that could be converted to parking by the homeowner. It is therefore considered that a fourth parking space could potentially be provided if necessary as there is available space for further parking to be provided at the front of the property. Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of parking and highway safety.
The majority of the site lies within an area of archaeological potential (HER17167). The Archaeologist has been consulted but has no comments to make regarding this proposal. Consequently, there would be no archaeological constraint on this development and the proposal would have an acceptable archaeological impact.
The Bedfordshire Fire & Rescue Service have been consulted and request that fire hydrants are installed at the site at the developer's cost. Whilst the comments of the Fire Service are acknowledged, this application is for extensions to an existing dwelling and would not affect fire safety at the site. Given the nature of the proposed development, it is not considered appropriate to require fire hydrant provision by means of condition as the existing fire safety arrangements would be suitable.
Occupiers of neighbouring properties have been consulted and 1no comment has also been received from a neighbouring occupier stating that they are in support of the proposal. Wrestlingworth and Cockayne Hatley Parish Council have also been consulted on this application, however no comments have been made.
Overall, it is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2, T3, EE4, HE1 and HE3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan (2021), Section 11 of the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide, the Parking Standards for New Developments SPD, Sections 12, 15 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2024) and Policies T2, BE1 and BE3 of the adopted Wrestlingworth and Cockayne Hatley Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2031.The application site relates to a two-storey, detached dwelling located to the northern side of Braggs Lane in Wrestlingworth. The dwelling is constructed of facing brickwork with brown horizontal timber cladding to the first floor front elevation of the building, a concrete interlocking tile pitched roof and white uPVC fenestration. There is a conservatory to the western side of the building. There is a hardstanding parking area to the front of the building and an integral single garage. The site is adjacent to the dwellings of 9 Braggs Lane to the west and Holly Tree House to the east. To the north is the dwelling known as 88 High Street, which is a Grade II listed building, however, the application property is not considered to be within its setting. The site also lies within an area of archaeological potential (HER17167).
Planning permission is sought for two storey side and front extensions, the replacement of the existing mono pitched roof with a dual pitched roof, the addition of solar panels to the garage roof and EV charging point to the side of the garage, the addition of two velux rooflights within the existing rear elevation and other fenestration alterations and change of external materials.
The proposal involves various extensions and external alterations to the extent that the proposal is considered to appear as the remodelling of the existing dwelling. It is considered that the existing property is not of any particular architectural merit and whilst set at the end of a row of three properties that appear to have been constructed together and are of similar design, the uniformity of this row of properties has been eroded slightly through extensions and alterations over time and the loss of the distinctive mono pitched roof in favour of a dual pitched roof of more conventional design is not considered to result in a harmful visual impact. The two-storey front extension would include large areas of glazing and would be constructed of materials that would contrast with the rest of the building. Front extensions of this design are not found elsewhere within the surrounding street scene, however, it is not considered that this front extension would unduly dominate the frontage of the dwelling nor unbalance the proportions of the dwelling and would not appear unacceptably prominent within the surrounding street scene. The two storey side extension above the existing conservatory would not be set down from the main roof ridge nor set back from the front elevation of the building which is encouraged within the design principles of the Design Guide to create a subservient relationship to the main building. However, in this instance, given that the building as a whole is proposed to be remodelled and roof form altered, and given the shallow pitch of the proposed roof, it is considered that it would be difficult for the extension to be provided with a degree of subservience to the rest of the building in a sympathetic manner. As such, in this case, this element of the proposal is considered have an acceptable visual impact. Given the different material palette found within the surrounding area, it is not considered that the alterations to the materials, including the timber vertical weatherboarding, slate tile roof and dark fenestration would have a harmful visual impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding street scene. The proposal also includes the installation of a solar panel array above the existing front garage roof, and whilst these are no found on surrounding properties, these would not be considered to appear unduly prominent and would have an acceptable visual impact. The proposal also includes the installation of an EV charger and whilst it is stated in the proposal description that this charger would be installed to the side of the building and its position has been shown on the proposed Block Plan, no detailed plans of this element of the proposal have been provided. However, given the recent changes to permitted development rights for domestic EV chargers, it is considered likely that these works would constitute permitted development and so it is not considered appropriate to require further details of the EV charger by condition. It is noted that 88 High Street to the rear of the site is a Grade II listed building and Toad Hall to the southern side of Braggs Lane is identified in the Neighbourhood Plan as a non-designated heritage asset, however, the building is not considered to be within the setting of these heritage assets and therefore the proposal would not impact their character and significance.
The two-storey front extension would measure approximately 3.7m in width, 2.1m in depth and 6.15m in height. Given its modest projection beyond the front elevation of the existing property and that it would be set away from the boundaries of 9 Braggs Lane and Holly Tree House by 7.3m and 10.3m respectively, it is not considered that this two-storey front extension would give rise to any harmful loss of light or overbearing impact for occupiers of these adjacent two properties. The two-storey side extension is proposed to be positioned to the western side of the dwelling and would replace the existing conservatory, bringing two-storey built form closer to neighbouring 9 Braggs Lane to the west. However, there are no windows within the side elevation of 9 Braggs Lane directly opposite the proposed side extension, other than a small window serving a W/C. Given this, the side extension is not considered to result in any harmful loss of light for occupiers of neighbouring 9 Braggs Lane and given that the side extension would be set off the shared boundary by approximately 1.3m and would not project beyond the existing front or rear building line of this neighbouring property, it is not considered that the side extension would result in any harmful overbearing impact. The change from a mono pitched roof to dual pitched roof would change the massing of the roof, however the roof ridge would be lower than the existing roof and it is not considered that these changes to the roof form would materially impact neighbours in terms of resulting in any harmful loss of light or overbearing impact. All other neighbouring properties are considered to be set a sufficient distance away so as to not be adversely affected by any loss of light or overbearing impact.
The proposal includes the installation of two new windows and a door within the ground floor eastern side elevation of the dwelling serving a study, utility room and garage. Given that these windows would not serve habitable spaces and that there is a boundary wall with fencing screening views across to neighbouring Holly Tree House, it is not considered that any harmful overlooking would arise for occupiers of this neighbouring property from these windows. Within the first floor side elevation of the two-storey side extension, there is proposed to be a window which would face towards 9 Braggs Lane to the west. However, this window would serve an en-suite bathroom which is not a habitable space and is proposed to be obscure-glazed. There are no first floor windows within the side elevation of this neighbouring property opposite the window and so no harmful overlooking would occur. Within the rear elevation, there would be new bi-fold doors within the ground floor, however, these would be replacing existing openings and views across towards the private amenity spaces of adjacent properties would be screened by existing boundary treatment between gardens. Two rooflights are also proposed to be installed within the existing rear roof above the lounge, however, given the angle and position of these rooflights they would not result in direct views towards any neighbouring properties. Within the first floor rear elevation, there are proposed to be four new windows installed which would all serve bedrooms. Given the separation distance of over 35m to 88 High Street to the rear of the site and screening provided by the intervening trees, it is not considered that these additional windows would result in any harmful overlooking of this neighbour to the rear. Whilst there would be some views of parts of the rear garden areas of both adjacent properties (9 Braggs Lane and Holly Tree House) this is a usual relationship that would exist between two-storey properties set within a similar building line and so would not represent any harmful overlooking. The proposal also includes various alterations to openings within the ground and first floor of the front elevation of the building, however, considering the separation distances of over 27m to the neighbouring properties opposite (6, 8 and 10 Braggs Lane), it is not considered that any harmful overlooking would arise. Whilst some views of the front driveway areas and front gardens of adjacent 9 Braggs Lane and Holly Tree House may be achieved, these are not considered to form private amenity spaces and so would not result in any undue loss of privacy. All other neighbouring properties are considered to be set a sufficient distance away so as to not be adversely affected by any overlooking or experience a harmful loss of privacy.
The proposal initially sought to alter and enlarge the hardstanding parking area to the front of the property and also included the installation of 1.2m high automated gates to the front of the driveway. The plans originally submitted showed the red line site boundary going up to the carriageway edge. However, along Braggs Lane the public highway not only includes the carriageway itself but also a section of land to either side of it and so part of the grass verge and hardstanding area within the site lies within the public highway. Given that this land had been included within the red line boundary of the site and works to alter the hardstanding area were proposed to take place within this land and the appropriate notice had not been served on the Highway Authority, the plans have since been amended to remove this area from the red line site boundary and no development would take place within the public highway land. Also, the Highway Officer had raised that the gates shown on the original plans would not be acceptable as there is a requirement for gates to be set back 5.0m from the public highway to avoid obstruction to road users when opening and closing gates. Given this, the gates have been omitted from the proposed plans and the proposal description amended accordingly.
The proposed extensions would result in an increase in the number of bedrooms within the property from 4no to 5no. As set out in the Parking Standards SPD, the current required parking provision for a five-bedroom dwelling is 4no off-road parking spaces measuring 2.5m x 5.0m, unless abutting a solid structure or planting which would require an additional 1.0m margin. The Highway Officer notes that the existing dwelling has 2no off-street parking spaces, which is below the required 3no parking spaces for a four-bedroom property. The hardstanding parking area within the site is proposed to be enlarged to accommodate at least 3no vehicles. In recognition of the current level of parking for the existing property and that only one bedroom would be added and an additional parking space is being proposed, the Highway Officer is satisfied with the overall parking provision and has raised no objection accordingly. In any case, whilst only 3no parking spaces are shown, it is noted that 4.5.2 of the Parking Standards SPD states that the first two parking spaces must be provided within the site and the other parking spaces may be provided as accessible land that could be converted to parking by the homeowner. It is therefore considered that a fourth parking space could potentially be provided if necessary as there is available space for further parking to be provided at the front of the property. Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable in terms of parking and highway safety.
The majority of the site lies within an area of archaeological potential (HER17167). The Archaeologist has been consulted but has no comments to make regarding this proposal. Consequently, there would be no archaeological constraint on this development and the proposal would have an acceptable archaeological impact.
The Bedfordshire Fire & Rescue Service have been consulted and request that fire hydrants are installed at the site at the developer's cost. Whilst the comments of the Fire Service are acknowledged, this application is for extensions to an existing dwelling and would not affect fire safety at the site. Given the nature of the proposed development, it is not considered appropriate to require fire hydrant provision by means of condition as the existing fire safety arrangements would be suitable.
Occupiers of neighbouring properties have been consulted and 1no comment has also been received from a neighbouring occupier stating that they are in support of the proposal. Wrestlingworth and Cockayne Hatley Parish Council have also been consulted on this application, however no comments have been made.
Overall, it is considered that the proposal would be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2, T3, EE4, HE1 and HE3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan (2021), Section 11 of the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide, the Parking Standards for New Developments SPD, Sections 12, 15 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2024) and Policies T2, BE1 and BE3 of the adopted Wrestlingworth and Cockayne Hatley Neighbourhood Plan 2016-2031. |
| 2
)Based on information submitted there are no known issues raised in the context of Human Rights / The Equalities Act 2010 and as such there would be no relevant implications.Based on information submitted there are no known issues raised in the context of Human Rights / The Equalities Act 2010 and as such there would be no relevant implications. |
| 3
)GDP Policy Informative Central Beds Local Plan
In accordance with Article 35 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, the reason for any condition above relates to the Policies as referred to in the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).GDP Policy Informative Central Beds Local Plan
In accordance with Article 35 (1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, the reason for any condition above relates to the Policies as referred to in the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). |
| 4
)This permission relates only to that required under the Town & Country Planning Acts and does not include any consent or approval under any other enactment or under the Building Regulations. Any other consent or approval which is necessary must be obtained from the appropriate authority.This permission relates only to that required under the Town & Country Planning Acts and does not include any consent or approval under any other enactment or under the Building Regulations. Any other consent or approval which is necessary must be obtained from the appropriate authority. |
| 5
)Will a new extension affect your Council Tax Charge?
The rate of Council Tax you pay depends on which valuation band your home is placed in. This is determined by the market value of your home as at 1 April 1991.
Your property's Council Tax band may change if the property is extended. The Council Tax band will only change when a relevant transaction takes place. For example, if you sell your property after extending it, the new owner may have to pay a higher band of Council Tax.
If however you add an annexe to your property, the Valuation Office Agency may decide that the annexe should be banded separately for Council Tax. If this happens, you will have to start paying Council Tax for the annexe as soon as it is completed. If the annexe is occupied by a relative of the residents of the main dwelling, it may qualify for a Council Tax discount or exemption. Contact the Council for advice on 0300 300 8306.
The website link is:
https://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/council-tax-bandsWill a new extension affect your Council Tax Charge?
The rate of Council Tax you pay depends on which valuation band your home is placed in. This is determined by the market value of your home as at 1 April 1991.
Your property's Council Tax band may change if the property is extended. The Council Tax band will only change when a relevant transaction takes place. For example, if you sell your property after extending it, the new owner may have to pay a higher band of Council Tax.
If however you add an annexe to your property, the Valuation Office Agency may decide that the annexe should be banded separately for Council Tax. If this happens, you will have to start paying Council Tax for the annexe as soon as it is completed. If the annexe is occupied by a relative of the residents of the main dwelling, it may qualify for a Council Tax discount or exemption. Contact the Council for advice on 0300 300 8306.
The website link is:
https://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk/council-tax-bands |
|
|---|