REPORT SUMMARY

 

REFERENCE NO -  14/0823
APPLICATION PROPOSAL An application for a single storey rear addition
ADDRESS 67, Hockers Lane, Detling, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 3JW
RECOMMENDATION APPROVED SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
SUMMARY OF REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION It is not considered that the proposed addition will result in any material harm to the character or setting of the AONB, SLA or the strategic gap, will not result in any material harm to the outlook or amenity or properties overlooking or abutting the site  or have any material impact on the character or layout of the locality.
REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE   It is contrary to views expressed by the Detling Parish Council
WARD Detling And Thurnham Ward		PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL Detling	APPLICANT Mr & Mrs R Carter AGENT CK Designs
DECISION DUE DATE 09/07/14		PUBLICITY EXPIRY DATE 09/07/14	OFFICER SITE VISIT DATE 28/05/14
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY (including appeals and relevant history on adjoining sites):
App No	Proposal			Decision	Date

 

PN/14/0030	PN/14/0030: Prior notification application for rear ground floor extension having a depth of 8 metres, a maximum height of 3.55 metres and an eaves height of 2.55 metres	Refused	09/05/14
Summarise Reasons: As the site lies within an AONB the application could not be dealt with under the Prior Notification Procedure.

 

 

MAIN REPORT

 

1.0          DESCRIPTION OF SITE

 

1.01     The site is occupied by a detached bungalow located on the east side of Hockers Lane and falling within the settlement of Detling.

 

 

 

 

2.0       PROPOSAL

 

2.01     The proposal involves the erection of a single storey rear addition having a rear projection of just under 8 metres, an eaves height of 2.55 metres and an overall height of 3.6 metres.

 

3.0       PLANNING CONSTRAINTS

 

3.01     The site is falls within the identified village confines of Detling. It also falls within the Kent Downs AONB, the North Downs Special Landscape Area (SLA) while also being subject to strategic gap policy.

 

4.0       POLICY AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

 

4.01     Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000:  ENV28, ENV31, ENV33, ENV34,  H18

Emerging Local Plan- DM4, DM8,
Government Policy:  NPPF 2012, NPPG 2014

Adopted residential extensions SPD.

 

 

5.0       LOCAL REPRESENTATIONS

 

5.01     2 neighbours consulted – no representations received.

 

 

 

6.0       CONSULTATIONS

 

6.01        Detling Parish Council –   Object on the grounds that the addition is too large in relation to the size of the existing property and should be reduced in size.

 

 

 

7.0         BACKGROUND PAPERS AND PLANS

 

7.01     Plans received on the 15^th May 2014.

 

8.0       APPRAISAL

 

 

Principle of Development

 

8.01    The site is falls within the identified village confines of Detling. Extension of houses in village confines are subject to policy H18 of the adopted local plan and the residential extension’s SPD adopted in 2009.

 

8.02    The site also falls within the Kent Down AONB, North Downs Special Landscape Area (SLA) while being subject to strategic gap policy. However given the existing built up nature of the area comprising mainly detached bungalows fronting Hockers Lane and in the absence of other objections to the proposal, it is considered that the proposal will have no material impact on the character or setting of the AONB, SLA or the strategic gap.

 

8.03    As such, there is considered to be no objection in principle to the proposed development and consideration turns on matters of detail being the size design and siting of the proposed addition, impact on the outlook and amenity of residents overlooking and abutting the site and effect on the character and layout of the locality.  

 

            Size, Design and siting:

8.04    The adopted residential extensions SPD requires that the scale, proportion and height of extensions should be subordinate to the original house and fit unobtrusively with the building and its setting.

8.05    Dealing first with the design of the addition, the existing bungalow is of traditional uncluttered design with a pitched and tiled hipped roof. The proposed addition reflects this uncluttered appearance having a plain exterior below eaves level. Above eaves level the extension will be capped by flat roof hidden behind a low false pitched roof running around the perimeter of the addition. It is considered that use of this roof treatment will substantially mitigate the impression of a large expanse of flat roof which might otherwise appear out of character with the locality. As such it is considered that the proposal represents an acceptable example of domestic architecture appropriate to its setting to which no design objection is identified.

8.06    Regarding the size and siting of the addition, the adopted residential extensions SPD normally seeks to restrict extensions to detached houses to no more than 4 metres.

8.07    The remaining considerations is therefore whether there are sufficient mitigating circumstances to permit an addition 8 metres in depth without it resulting in material harm to the outlook or amenity of adjacent dwellings overlooking or abutting the site or the character of the area.

            Impact on residential amenity and character of area:

8.08    Given the siting of the proposed addition the main impact of the development will be felt on 65 and 69 Hockers Lane, being detached bungalows abutting the site to the north and south.

 

8.09    The site on both sides is currently defined by 1.8 metre high closeboarded fencing while the property immediately to the south (69 Hockers Lane) has a detached garage sited close to its boundary. Given that the depth of the proposed addition will only exceed the depth of the garage by just under 2 metres, it is considered that the combined impact of the existing fencing and garage means that 69 Hockers Lane will largely be screened from the proposed development and substantially unaffected as a consequence.

 

8.10    Turning to 65 Hockers Lane the detached bungalow abutting the site to the north,the rear addition will extend just over 10 metres beyond the rear main wall of this property. In normal circumstances such a projection would be clearly excessive and be considered harmful to outlook and amenity as a consequence.

8.11    However when taking into account (a) a setback of the addition just over 1 metre from the common boundary (b) existence of a 1.8 metre high closeboarded fence oversailed by substantial planting and (c) that the eaves height of the proposed addition at 2.55 metres does not significantly exceed the height of the existing boundary fence and planting, it is considered that the proposed addition will be substantially screened from 65 Hockers Lane.

 

8.12    There is also the need to assess the proposal in relation to the maintenance of the access of sunlight and daylight to 65 Hockers Lane. Given the setback of the addition from the common boundary and that it only marginally exceeds the height of existing boundary fencing and planting, it is not considered that the proposal will result in any material loss of sunlight and daylight to 65 Hockers Lane.

 

8.13    As such the overall impact of the development on 65 Hocker Lane is considered to fall within acceptable limits.

 

8.14    Regarding any material impact on the character and layout of the area, it is acknowledged that the site falls within an AONB and the need to safeguard the aspects from this are a material consideration. There is also a public right of way over 350 metres to the east of the site. However this part of Hockers Lane is already defined by existing bungalows of varying sizes and depths with their rear elevations having staggered in relation to one another. The result of this is that some of the existing bungalows already project deep into their rear amenity areas in a sporadic manner. Given this existing layout pattern and distance from any public vantage points the proposed addition will not appear out of character with the area and not have any material impact on the AONB as a consequence.  

 

9.0       CONCLUSION

 

9.01     It is not considered that the proposed addition will result in any material harm to the character or setting of the AONB, SLA or the strategic gap, will not result in any material harm to the outlook or amenity or properties overlooking or abutting the site or have any material impact on the character or layout of the locality.

 

9.02    In the circumstances it is considered that the proposal is worthy of support and that planning permission should be granted as a consequence.

 

 

 

10.0     RECOMMENDATION – GRANT Subject to the following conditions:

 

 

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission;

 

Reason: In accordance with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 

 

2. The development herby approved shall be carried out in the external materials to match the existing.

 

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity.

 

3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans drawing no:A67143 and plans received on the 15^th May 2014. a

 

Reason: To ensure the quality of the development is maintained in the interests of visual amenity.

 

 

Note to Applicant

 

In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF, Maidstone Borough Council (MBC) takes a positive and proactive approach to development proposals focused on solutions. MBC works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by:

 

Offering a pre-application advice and duty desk service.

 

Where possible, suggesting solutions to secure a successful outcome.

 

As appropriate, updating applicants/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application.

 

In this instance:

 

The application was acceptable as submitted.

 

Case Officer: Graham Parkinson

 

NB       For full details of all papers submitted with this application please refer to the relevant       Public Access pages on the council’s website.

            The conditions set out in the report may be subject to such reasonable change as is         necessary to ensure accuracy and enforceability.