Appeal 6004024

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a two storey side and single storey rear extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2025/0268, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos. 154MR/BR/01/C (elevations) and 154MR/BR/02/B (floor plans).

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match in material, colour and texture to those used in the existing building.

The first floor window serving the bathroom on the eastern elevation shall be glazed with obscured glass and shall be permanently maintained in that

An application for costs was made by [name] against High Peak Borough Council. This application is the subject of a separate decision.

This appeal relates to a planning application that was not determined by the Council within the prescribed period. The Council has confirmed that, following the submission of revised plans during the processing of the application, should a formal decision have been made on the proposal, planning permission would have been approved.

The Council’s appeal statement concludes that the proposal would be proportionate and subordinate additions to the existing dwelling and would respect the character of the dwelling and the surrounding area. Further, subject to a condition requiring obscure glazing in a proposed first floor side window, it would not have an adverse impact upon neighbouring amenity, nor would there be any highway impact. As such, the Council advise that proposal would accord with the relevant policies of the High Peak Local Plan, adopted April 2016 and there are no relevant policies in the [site address] Neighbourhood Plan 2013-2038, made

It is also concluded that the proposal would comply with guidance contained within the [name] Planning Document, February 2018 and the High Peak Local Development Framework, [name], Supplementary Planning Document, adopted December 2005.

There were no third-party objections to the planning application.

From the information before me and observations at my site visit, I find the proposed extensions would be of a suitable scale and design. They would not adversely affect the character and appearance of the host dwelling, or the surrounding area. An acceptable level of off-street parking for 3 vehicles would be provided within the proposed garage and to the front of the dwelling behind an existing low boundary wall and vegetation. Subject to the imposition of a condition to secure obscure glazing in the proposed first-floor side bathroom window, no adverse harm would be caused to the living conditions of neighbouring residents as a result of the proposal. I therefore have no reason to form a different view to the Council.

The Council has provided a list of suggested conditions that it considers would be appropriate. I have considered these against the tests set out in the National Planning Policy Framework, and Planning Practice Guidance. Along with the standard time limit, a plans condition is imposed in the interest of certainty. In this regard, the Council’s suggested conditions refer to a plan that was not submitted with the appeal (120MR/PL/01C). As such, the views of the parties were sought on the status of this plan. No response was received from the Council. The appellant responded to confirm the correct plan reference (154MR/BR/01/C). This plan matches that submitted with the appeal and is referred to in the Council’s officer report. On this basis, I have referred to drawing no.154MR/BR/01/C in the plans

A condition requiring that external materials match those used on the existing dwelling is necessary to protect the character and appearance of the dwelling and the area. I have also imposed the Council’s suggested condition requiring that the proposed first-floor side window is obscure glazed to protect the privacy of occupants of [address].

The proposal accords with the development plan and there are no material considerations to indicate a decision should be taken other than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal is allowed. [planning inspector] INSPECTOR