| Informative Notes: | | 1
)Reasons for granting:
The application site is a detached bungalow located along Kings Road, Flitwick. The proposal seeks planning permission for the demolition of rear extension and garage and erection of new garage and single storey rear extension. Replacement roof with increased ridge height and chimney removal. Loft conversion, side dormer window and roof light.
The existing dwelling has a garage, dining room, toilet and store to the rear. To facilitate the single storey rear extension this built form would be demolished and it would extend 0.17m past the existing rear elevation on site. In addition the proposal would extend 10m in width. Whilst the proposal, following the demolition of the conservatory, garage, dining room and toilet would form a considerable extension to the dwelling, the proposal would appear subservient when viewed in the context of the existing built form. The proposal also includes an attached garage on the side elevation of the dwellinghouse. This element of this proposal would be visible to the streetscene of Kings Road, however it would remain set back from the public highway, and would not interfere with existing parking provision to the side elevation of the main dwellinghouse. The proposed rooflights would be considered small and modest in scale and would not be considered to result in harm to the character and appearance of the area.
The proposal seeks to extend the depth and height of the existing dwelling itself, thereby also increasing the ridge height of the dwellinghouse, which would be visible from within the streetscene. Whilst the proposal would increase the height and scale of the dwelling at the site, on the basis of the varied development in the surrounding area the proposal would not be deemed to result in any detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area. The proposal also includes a side dormer. The proposed side dormer would be readily visible within the street scene of Kings Road. While there are not currently any side dormers readily visible within the street scene, a similar scale dormer could be constructed under permitted development rights and therefore any impact on the character and appearance of the area resulting from the dormer would not be considered significant enough to warrant refusal. The roof extension is proposed to include a Juliet balcony to the rear elevation and whilst this is not a feature of the existing dwelling nor properties in the immediate surroundings, given that the rear of the building is not readily visible from Kings Road, it is not considered that this would have any detrimental impact on the visual character of the wider area.
The external materials of the dormer window would be finished in Silicone render in off white colour dark wood composite cladding and these are design features of a modern dwelling. A varied design of dwellings, with use of a variety of materials, characterise the streetscene and as such, it is considered that the materials proposed would appear respectful of the surrounding area, and the host dwelling itself. On balance, this aspect of the proposal would not be deemed to result in any detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area.
The proposed 'L' shaped rear extension would be set marginally off the boundary with No.8 Kings Road. The proposed rear extension would have a limited impact on the light to this neighbouring property (rear elevation). However given the existing built form on site and single storey nature of the proposal would not be considered so significant to warrant a reason for refusal. On balance, it is not considered that the single storey rear extension due to the scale, orientation and the design of the proposal would result in any loss of privacy or overbearing impact to this neighbour. All other neighbouring properties are considered sufficiently separated. The proposed attached garage would be set marginally off the boundary with No.8 Kings Road. The proposed garage/side extension would have a limited impact on the light to this neighbouring property (side window) however given the proposal's single storey nature this would not be considered so significant to warrant a reason for refusal. It is not considered that the single storey garage/side extension due to the scale and design of the proposal would result in any loss of privacy or overbearing impact to this neighbour. All other neighbouring properties for the front extension are considered sufficiently separated for there to be any neighbouring impact due to the sitting and scale of the proposal.
The works to convert the roof space are of a scale and design that would not result in an overbearing impact, a loss of light or a loss of privacy to any neighbouring dwelling. The proposed side dormer would be set near the boundary with the property known as 'Flitwick Bowls Club'. However, given the bowls club is not residential in that it's primary use do not provide habitable space, it is not considered that the proposal would result in harm to the amenity of the users of this building.
The proposal would increase the bedrooms in the dwelling from three to four bedrooms and so three off street parking spaces would be required. The application would see the loss of the existing garage on site. However the existing garage would not be considered as a parking space due to the internal dimensions not falling within the tolerances as provided within the Parking Standards for New Developments SPD (2023). The new garage would also not be considered as a parking space. As measured from Plan No.CBC001 there appears to only be two workable parking space on the driveway. Although the site has less allocated parking than what a 4 bedroom dwelling would normally require it is not considered, due to the location and type of road, when considering the existing public highway and parking arrangements on balance, that the development would result in an unacceptable impact upon highway safety in accordance with paragraph 116 of the NPPF, and is therefore acceptable in this regard.
The application was subject to public consultation and no representations were received.
It is considered that the proposal will be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2 and T3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan, Parking Standards in new development SPD, Section 11 of the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide and Section 12 of the NPPF.Reasons for granting:
The application site is a detached bungalow located along Kings Road, Flitwick. The proposal seeks planning permission for the demolition of rear extension and garage and erection of new garage and single storey rear extension. Replacement roof with increased ridge height and chimney removal. Loft conversion, side dormer window and roof light.
The existing dwelling has a garage, dining room, toilet and store to the rear. To facilitate the single storey rear extension this built form would be demolished and it would extend 0.17m past the existing rear elevation on site. In addition the proposal would extend 10m in width. Whilst the proposal, following the demolition of the conservatory, garage, dining room and toilet would form a considerable extension to the dwelling, the proposal would appear subservient when viewed in the context of the existing built form. The proposal also includes an attached garage on the side elevation of the dwellinghouse. This element of this proposal would be visible to the streetscene of Kings Road, however it would remain set back from the public highway, and would not interfere with existing parking provision to the side elevation of the main dwellinghouse. The proposed rooflights would be considered small and modest in scale and would not be considered to result in harm to the character and appearance of the area.
The proposal seeks to extend the depth and height of the existing dwelling itself, thereby also increasing the ridge height of the dwellinghouse, which would be visible from within the streetscene. Whilst the proposal would increase the height and scale of the dwelling at the site, on the basis of the varied development in the surrounding area the proposal would not be deemed to result in any detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area. The proposal also includes a side dormer. The proposed side dormer would be readily visible within the street scene of Kings Road. While there are not currently any side dormers readily visible within the street scene, a similar scale dormer could be constructed under permitted development rights and therefore any impact on the character and appearance of the area resulting from the dormer would not be considered significant enough to warrant refusal. The roof extension is proposed to include a Juliet balcony to the rear elevation and whilst this is not a feature of the existing dwelling nor properties in the immediate surroundings, given that the rear of the building is not readily visible from Kings Road, it is not considered that this would have any detrimental impact on the visual character of the wider area.
The external materials of the dormer window would be finished in Silicone render in off white colour dark wood composite cladding and these are design features of a modern dwelling. A varied design of dwellings, with use of a variety of materials, characterise the streetscene and as such, it is considered that the materials proposed would appear respectful of the surrounding area, and the host dwelling itself. On balance, this aspect of the proposal would not be deemed to result in any detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area.
The proposed 'L' shaped rear extension would be set marginally off the boundary with No.8 Kings Road. The proposed rear extension would have a limited impact on the light to this neighbouring property (rear elevation). However given the existing built form on site and single storey nature of the proposal would not be considered so significant to warrant a reason for refusal. On balance, it is not considered that the single storey rear extension due to the scale, orientation and the design of the proposal would result in any loss of privacy or overbearing impact to this neighbour. All other neighbouring properties are considered sufficiently separated. The proposed attached garage would be set marginally off the boundary with No.8 Kings Road. The proposed garage/side extension would have a limited impact on the light to this neighbouring property (side window) however given the proposal's single storey nature this would not be considered so significant to warrant a reason for refusal. It is not considered that the single storey garage/side extension due to the scale and design of the proposal would result in any loss of privacy or overbearing impact to this neighbour. All other neighbouring properties for the front extension are considered sufficiently separated for there to be any neighbouring impact due to the sitting and scale of the proposal.
The works to convert the roof space are of a scale and design that would not result in an overbearing impact, a loss of light or a loss of privacy to any neighbouring dwelling. The proposed side dormer would be set near the boundary with the property known as 'Flitwick Bowls Club'. However, given the bowls club is not residential in that it's primary use do not provide habitable space, it is not considered that the proposal would result in harm to the amenity of the users of this building.
The proposal would increase the bedrooms in the dwelling from three to four bedrooms and so three off street parking spaces would be required. The application would see the loss of the existing garage on site. However the existing garage would not be considered as a parking space due to the internal dimensions not falling within the tolerances as provided within the Parking Standards for New Developments SPD (2023). The new garage would also not be considered as a parking space. As measured from Plan No.CBC001 there appears to only be two workable parking space on the driveway. Although the site has less allocated parking than what a 4 bedroom dwelling would normally require it is not considered, due to the location and type of road, when considering the existing public highway and parking arrangements on balance, that the development would result in an unacceptable impact upon highway safety in accordance with paragraph 116 of the NPPF, and is therefore acceptable in this regard.
The application was subject to public consultation and no representations were received.
It is considered that the proposal will be in accordance with Policies HQ1, T2 and T3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan, Parking Standards in new development SPD, Section 11 of the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide 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
)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
)Please note that the unnumbered drawings submitted in connection with this application have been given unique numbers by the Local Planning Authority. The numbers can be sourced by examining the plans on the View a Planning Application pages of the Councils website www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk.Please note that the unnumbered drawings submitted in connection with this application have been given unique numbers by the Local Planning Authority. The numbers can be sourced by examining the plans on the View a Planning Application pages of the Councils website www.centralbedfordshire.gov.uk. |
| 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 |
|
|---|