PERMISSION GRANTED TO convert and extend outbuilding to a dwellinghouse at bunkers, saddleworth
Permission has been granted to convert an outbuilding into a dwellinghouse with a single storey front extension. The Council argued the extension was a disproportionate addition to the original building and was harmful to the traditional character and appearance of the immediate area, which was in close proximity to Listed Buildings.
The Planning Inspector disagreed with the Council and considered the extension to not amount to a disproportionate addition. In his assessment the Inspector concluded:
"The proposed extension would project less than the depth of the original outbuilding and would be approximately half the width of the existing elevation. It would comprise noticeably less volume than the original outbuilding. Moreover, its reduced roof height and position to one side would ensure that it appears as a subordinate addition, where the scale of the original outbuilding would remain dominant. As such, having regard to the comparatively low volume and footprint of the proposed extension and my above reasoning, I am satisfied that it would not amount to a disproportionate addition over and above the size of the original outbuilding."
In terms of the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the area the Inspector was mindful of several nearby extensions and concluded:
"In my view, the proposed dual pitched gabled extension would be of an overall traditional design, finished in sympathetic materials that would integrate well with the simple form of the outbuilding. Although altered the building would retain a relatively simple footprint and form. Due to its modest proportions, reduced ridge height and location to one side of the front elevation, it would clearly read as a subordinate rather than dominant addition. The overall linear form of the original building would also remain apparent. Whilst the proposed alterations would render the building more akin to the appearance of a bungalow than a simple, rural outbuilding, there is no evidence before me to suggest that alterations could not be made to the existing outbuilding that would result in a similar outcome."
The Planning Inspector disagreed with the Council and considered the extension to not amount to a disproportionate addition. In his assessment the Inspector concluded:
"The proposed extension would project less than the depth of the original outbuilding and would be approximately half the width of the existing elevation. It would comprise noticeably less volume than the original outbuilding. Moreover, its reduced roof height and position to one side would ensure that it appears as a subordinate addition, where the scale of the original outbuilding would remain dominant. As such, having regard to the comparatively low volume and footprint of the proposed extension and my above reasoning, I am satisfied that it would not amount to a disproportionate addition over and above the size of the original outbuilding."
In terms of the impact of the development on the character and appearance of the area the Inspector was mindful of several nearby extensions and concluded:
"In my view, the proposed dual pitched gabled extension would be of an overall traditional design, finished in sympathetic materials that would integrate well with the simple form of the outbuilding. Although altered the building would retain a relatively simple footprint and form. Due to its modest proportions, reduced ridge height and location to one side of the front elevation, it would clearly read as a subordinate rather than dominant addition. The overall linear form of the original building would also remain apparent. Whilst the proposed alterations would render the building more akin to the appearance of a bungalow than a simple, rural outbuilding, there is no evidence before me to suggest that alterations could not be made to the existing outbuilding that would result in a similar outcome."
