| Informative Notes: | | 1
)Reasons for Granting
The application site is 34 Tring Road, Dunstable. The host dwelling is a detached dwelling and is surrounded by dwellings that are similar in scale and design. The site is inset from the Green Belt. Therefore, normal policies apply.
The proposed development would include the demolition of the side garage and erection of a single storey side extension, part single and part two storey rear extension and associated external changes.
The proposed single storey side extension would be highly visible within the streetscene with views along Tring Road. There is an existing garage and store which is detached from the host dwelling and is proposed to be demolished. The proposed side extension would be attached to host dwelling, whilst the side extension would sit below the eaves of the host dwelling it is considered its overall design, appropriate projection and that it would be marginally set back from the principal elevation by some 0.4 metres that the proposal on balance would not give rise to unacceptable harm to the host dwelling and the character and appearance of the area. The proposed part single and part two storey rear extension would be sited to the rear and as such it would not be visible within the streetscene. Whilst the part two storey rear element has not been set down from the main ridgeline, it would be considered that any set down could appear convoluted in its appearance. Moreover, the existing rear built form consists of a flat roof which contrasts against the hipped roof of the host dwelling which the flat roof adjoins to. The proposed part two storey rear element would have a hipped roof which would simplify the roof form of the host dwelling. Therefore in this instance, the part two storey rear extension due to its siting to the rear and its proposed roof design matching the existing main dwellinghouse would appear sympathetic to the existing built form and would not be considered to result in any adverse impact on the host dwelling or wider public realm. The rooflights would be deemed sympathetic additions to the host dwelling that would not result in harm to the character and appearance of the area. With regards to the render, there are examples within the wider street scene of render and a mix of external finishes to dwellings with predominantly brick and render in the immediate locale. However, whilst the change in external finish would be noticeable it is not considered that it would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area given the mixed grain of development present.
In terms of impact on neighbouring amenity, the proposed single storey side extension would be screened by existing built form at the host dwelling from No. 32 Tring Road. It is therefore not considered that this aspect of the proposal would give rise to unacceptable to the amenities of No. 32. The proposed infill of the existing loggia, part single storey and part two storey rear extension would be offset from the shared boundary with No. 32 Tring Road. Having regard to the appropriate scale and design of the proposal, it is not considered that the proposal would result in unacceptable harm to the amenities of this neighbour. With regards to No. 36 Tring Road, the proposed single storey side extension and part single and part two storey rear extension would be sited some 1.7 metres from the shared boundary with No. 36 Tring Road and there would be a further separation distance of some 2.9 metres from the nearest built form of this neighbour. Given the proposal appropriate projection along the shared boundary with No. 36, the separation distance from the shared boundary of this neighbour, the further separation distance from the nearest built form of No. 36 it is not considered that the proposal would give rise to unacceptable harm in regard to overbearingness, loss of light or loss of outlook. Moreover, the views from the rooflights would provide outlook upwards. As such, the proposal as a whole would not result in overlooking or loss of privacy concerns to the occupants at No. 36. Neighbouring properties: 13 and 15 Totternhoe Road are sited to the side boundary of the application site and would be sufficiently separated from the proposal. Numbers: 58 and 60 Coombe Drive and No. 40 Tring Road would also be sufficiently separated from the proposal. As such, the proposal as a whole would not give rise to unacceptable harm to the amenities of the above mentioned neighbours.
With regards to parking, the existing host dwelling is a 5 bedroom and the proposal would result in a reduction of bedrooms from 5 to 4. As such, the proposal would not result in additional parking spaces and would instead result in a reduction of parking spaces from 4 to 3 as detailed in the Parking Standards for New Development (August 2023).
The application site is located within the Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation (SAC). As no additional residential units are proposed, the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the SAC. In addition to this, Natural England were consulted and raised no objection in that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected nature conservation sites or landscapes.
It is therefore considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area and in relation to neighbouring amenity, it is considered on balance that the proposal would not result in a significant harm to the amenities of nearby neighbours. The proposal is therefore considered to be in conformity with Policy HQ1 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
The application was subject to public consultation and no representation were received.
The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2, T3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan (2021), Section 11 of the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide (2023) and Section 12 of the NPPF.Reasons for Granting
The application site is 34 Tring Road, Dunstable. The host dwelling is a detached dwelling and is surrounded by dwellings that are similar in scale and design. The site is inset from the Green Belt. Therefore, normal policies apply.
The proposed development would include the demolition of the side garage and erection of a single storey side extension, part single and part two storey rear extension and associated external changes.
The proposed single storey side extension would be highly visible within the streetscene with views along Tring Road. There is an existing garage and store which is detached from the host dwelling and is proposed to be demolished. The proposed side extension would be attached to host dwelling, whilst the side extension would sit below the eaves of the host dwelling it is considered its overall design, appropriate projection and that it would be marginally set back from the principal elevation by some 0.4 metres that the proposal on balance would not give rise to unacceptable harm to the host dwelling and the character and appearance of the area. The proposed part single and part two storey rear extension would be sited to the rear and as such it would not be visible within the streetscene. Whilst the part two storey rear element has not been set down from the main ridgeline, it would be considered that any set down could appear convoluted in its appearance. Moreover, the existing rear built form consists of a flat roof which contrasts against the hipped roof of the host dwelling which the flat roof adjoins to. The proposed part two storey rear element would have a hipped roof which would simplify the roof form of the host dwelling. Therefore in this instance, the part two storey rear extension due to its siting to the rear and its proposed roof design matching the existing main dwellinghouse would appear sympathetic to the existing built form and would not be considered to result in any adverse impact on the host dwelling or wider public realm. The rooflights would be deemed sympathetic additions to the host dwelling that would not result in harm to the character and appearance of the area. With regards to the render, there are examples within the wider street scene of render and a mix of external finishes to dwellings with predominantly brick and render in the immediate locale. However, whilst the change in external finish would be noticeable it is not considered that it would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area given the mixed grain of development present.
In terms of impact on neighbouring amenity, the proposed single storey side extension would be screened by existing built form at the host dwelling from No. 32 Tring Road. It is therefore not considered that this aspect of the proposal would give rise to unacceptable to the amenities of No. 32. The proposed infill of the existing loggia, part single storey and part two storey rear extension would be offset from the shared boundary with No. 32 Tring Road. Having regard to the appropriate scale and design of the proposal, it is not considered that the proposal would result in unacceptable harm to the amenities of this neighbour. With regards to No. 36 Tring Road, the proposed single storey side extension and part single and part two storey rear extension would be sited some 1.7 metres from the shared boundary with No. 36 Tring Road and there would be a further separation distance of some 2.9 metres from the nearest built form of this neighbour. Given the proposal appropriate projection along the shared boundary with No. 36, the separation distance from the shared boundary of this neighbour, the further separation distance from the nearest built form of No. 36 it is not considered that the proposal would give rise to unacceptable harm in regard to overbearingness, loss of light or loss of outlook. Moreover, the views from the rooflights would provide outlook upwards. As such, the proposal as a whole would not result in overlooking or loss of privacy concerns to the occupants at No. 36. Neighbouring properties: 13 and 15 Totternhoe Road are sited to the side boundary of the application site and would be sufficiently separated from the proposal. Numbers: 58 and 60 Coombe Drive and No. 40 Tring Road would also be sufficiently separated from the proposal. As such, the proposal as a whole would not give rise to unacceptable harm to the amenities of the above mentioned neighbours.
With regards to parking, the existing host dwelling is a 5 bedroom and the proposal would result in a reduction of bedrooms from 5 to 4. As such, the proposal would not result in additional parking spaces and would instead result in a reduction of parking spaces from 4 to 3 as detailed in the Parking Standards for New Development (August 2023).
The application site is located within the Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation (SAC). As no additional residential units are proposed, the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the SAC. In addition to this, Natural England were consulted and raised no objection in that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected nature conservation sites or landscapes.
It is therefore considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area and in relation to neighbouring amenity, it is considered on balance that the proposal would not result in a significant harm to the amenities of nearby neighbours. The proposal is therefore considered to be in conformity with Policy HQ1 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan.
The application was subject to public consultation and no representation were received.
The proposal is therefore considered to be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2, T3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan (2021), Section 11 of the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide (2023) and Section 12 of the NPPF. |
| 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
)The site is located within the Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Natural England have not provided any comments on this application, however, as no additional independent overnight accommodation is proposed, the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the SAC.The site is located within the Chilterns Beechwoods Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Natural England have not provided any comments on this application, however, as no additional independent overnight accommodation is proposed, the proposal is not considered to have a detrimental impact upon the SAC. |
| 4
)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). |
| 5
)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. |
| 6
)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 |
|
|---|