Appeal 6006544

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted to erect two storey side and rear extensions with Juliet balconies proposed within rear and side elevations to include alterations to the existing roof and repositioning of rooflights, erect single storey rear extension with a roof lantern, with associated drainage and various associated works ([name] 02.09.2025 detailing sun tubes to the west side roof elevation) at [site address] , Grimsby, [name] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/0721/25/FULA, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

An application for costs was made by [name] against North East Lincolnshire Council. This is the subject of a separate decision.

In general, appeals are determined on the same basis as the original application. Accompanying the appellant’s grounds of appeal is a daylight and sunlight study which was not before the Council when it made its decision. It is a new technical assessment of the daylight and sunlight implications of the development. The appeal is being determined on the basis of a part 1 written representations procedure, therefore, I find that accepting the daylight and sunlight study as new evidence would be procedurally unfair – the Council and interested parties have had no opportunity to comment on it. Consequently, in making my decision, I have disregarded the daylight and sunlight study.

The main issue is the effect of the development on the living conditions of the occupiers of The Oakes, with particular reference to outlook, privacy and light.

[site address] is a large, detached house set within a spacious plot, served by large gardens. The closest neighbouring property is The Oakes to the west, whilst it benefits from there being no neighbouring properties located on the land to its immediate south, north and east. The Oakes is also a large, detached house. On its northern side, it is served by a large rear garden containing both extensive areas of lawn and patio.

As part of the development, a two-storey extension is proposed closer to [site address] ’s western boundary to provide a new living room and prayer room at ground floor, and a new bedroom with en-suite and dressing room at first floor. Projecting 9.45 metres (m) from the rear of the existing house, this would constitute a considerable rearward extension.

However, rather than being positioned directly on the shared property boundary with The Oakes, it would be set in from it. The extension’s roof ridge height would be much lower than that of the main roof, and it would incorporate a hipped roof form, with its roof pitch sloping away from the boundary. These design facets would assist in reducing the extension’s sense of scale and mass.

Although this new living room, prayer room and bedroom extension would flank windows serving a home office and kitchen within The Oakes, that serving the kitchen is well-separated from where the extension would be positioned and, furthermore, the home office is also served by a set of French doors and the kitchen by a more principal window which each face south over The Oakes’ spacious rear garden. In addition, the window to home office which would oppose the proposed extension already faces [site address] ’s existing two-storey side elevation as well as a hedge and fence which, altogether, provides a strong sense of enclosure on this side. As a result, the main outlook from the home office and kitchen at The Oakes would be retained.

[name] has external seating and patio areas adjacent to the shared boundary with [site address] , its rear garden is of such substantial size that extensive areas would remain well removed from the extension. As a result, the rear garden would not be visually dominated by the extension, and it would retain a generally open aspect in several directions. Furthermore, as the rear garden lies to the north of The Oakes, those areas closest to the rear of the house and the shared boundary are likely to already experience a considerable degree of shading. For these reasons, the extension would not unduly limit light within The Oakes’ rear garden.

As the extension would project rearwards by over 9m, views from the nearest north-facing bedroom within [site address] across The Oakes’ rear garden would become more oblique than at present. Windows are also proposed at first-floor level within [site address] ’s west facing elevation, but a condition can be imposed which would ensure that these would be obscurely glazed. The sun tubes would be small openings in the roof slope, and they would be angled towards the sky. The boundary fence and hedging would together effectively screen views from the proposed ground floor windows. For these reasons, the privacy of the occupants of The Oakes would not be unduly infringed upon.

Consequently, although the development would include a new living room, prayer room and bedroom extension amounting to a considerable rearward extension, and new fenestration, there are facets of the proposed design and of the layout, orientation and arrangement of [site address] and The Oakes which means that the ensuing effects would be mitigated. No unacceptable loss of outlook, privacy or light would occur for the occupiers of The Oakes.

The remaining extensions and alterations proposed as part of the development would provide [site address] with a new dining hall, extended utility, inner hall, day room, home gym with shower, master bedroom with en-suite and dressing room, and an extended bedroom. These elements would enlarge and alter the property primarily on its eastern side, or would be set well away from, or screened from, The Oakes. Consequently, these aspects of the development would also not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of The Oakes.

Therefore, I conclude that the effect of the development on the living conditions of the occupiers of The Oakes, with particular reference to outlook, privacy and light, would be acceptable. As a result, the development complies with Policy 5 of the North East Lincolnshire Local Plan 2013 to 2032 which, in summary and amongst other matters, sets out that developments will be considered with regard to their suitability and sustainability, including in respect to their size and scale and their impacts on neighbouring land uses.

It is suggested to me that an alternative development proposal could have been devised, one incorporating a design which would result in lesser effects on the occupiers of The Oakes. However, I must determine the development which is the subject of the appeal on its own merits and, in my main issue, I have set out the reasons why its effect on the occupiers of The Oakes would be acceptable.

The plans propose that the development would be served by water butts. A condition can be imposed to ensure this. With this approach to drainage secured, I have no firm basis on which to conclude that the development would not be adequately drained or would result in any increase in flood risks.

Large, detached houses set within generous plots are characteristic of the appearance of the area and its overall character. Although the proposed development would substantially enlarge [site address] and may extend beyond its original plot, it would remain consistent with this prevailing character as a substantial dwelling within a spacious setting. The design and use of external materials would also complement both the host property and the surrounding area. As such, the development would have an acceptable impact on the character and appearance of the locality.

Interested party representations assert that tree planting around [site address] has not been undertaken in accordance with a previously imposed planning condition. However, this is a separate planning compliance matter, and it has no meaningful bearing on my decision on the appeal proposal.

The Council has provided a list of suggested conditions that it considers would be appropriate. I have considered these in the light of the tests for the imposition of conditions set out within the National Planning Policy Framework and the content of the Planning Practice Guidance. In the interests of clarity or precision, I have made some amendments to the Council’s suggestions.

My schedule of conditions includes condition 1, which sets out the standard time limitation, and condition 2, which is necessary to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and necessary supporting documentation for the reason of certainty.

Condition 3, relating to the use of external materials, is necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the area. I have imposed condition 4 to ensure that the site is adequately drained. Conditions 5 and 6 are each needed to ensure that the effects of the development on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers are acceptable: the former in relation to the construction phase of the development, and the latter in relation to the privacy of the occupiers of The Oakes.

The development accords with the development plan as a whole, and there are no material considerations which indicate a decision should be made other than in accordance with it. Therefore, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

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 the following drawings and documents: dmc 25694/002 dmc 25694/003 rev B dmc 25694/004 rev A dmc 25694/005 rev A application form dated 11 August 2025

The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in the materials identified in section 10 of the application form dated 11 August 2025.

The extensions hereby permitted shall not be occupied or brought into use until the surface water drainage scheme, comprising of water butts, has been completed in accordance with the details shown on approved drawing dmc 25694/003 rev [name], the approved surface water drainage scheme shall be retained.

Demolition or construction works shall take place only between 08:00 and 18:00 Mondays to Fridays inclusive, between 08:00 and 13:00 on Saturdays, and shall not take place at any time on Sundays or on Bank or Public Holidays.

Each of the proposed first-floor, side elevation (west) windows, as identified on approved drawing dmc 25694/003 rev B, shall be obscured to at least level 3 of the Pilkington glass privacy scale (or equivalent). None of the rooms served by the proposed first-floor, side elevation (west) windows shall be occupied/brought into use until each of those windows have been obscured to at least level 3 of the Pilkington glass privacy scale (or equivalent). Once installed as such, the windows shall thereafter be retained.