Roof raise and replacement porch at The Millpond, Hardy Lane, Tockington

What is proposed

The application seeks a higher roof to create more living accommodation and a replacement porch.

“December 2025, which was not prepared in time for the committee on the 8 th January has also been provided. Additional commentary and assessment of this is addressed in paragraphs 5.51 to 5.52. 1.THE PROPOSAL 1.1Full planning permission is sought for the raising of ridge line to form additional living accommodation, and erection of replacement porch (re submission of P24/00294/HH) 1.2The application site is a detached dwelling located outside of any defined residential…”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier extensions were approved, while a previous roof-raising application was refused because cumulative extensions were disproportionate in the Green Belt.

“OFFTEM PSP2 Landscape PSP7 Development in the Green Belt PSP8 Residential Amenity PSP11 Transport Impact Management PSP16 Parking Standards PSP38 Development within Existing Residential Curtilages PSP40 Residential Development in the Countryside PSP43 Private Amenity Space Standards 2.3Supplementary Planning Guidance South Gloucestershire Design Checklist (Adopted August 2007) Residential Parking Standards (Adopted December 2013) Householder Design Guide (Adopted March 2021)…”

“3.5P99/2463 - Erection of rear porch and conservatory, detached garage and installation of dormer windows. Approved. 02.11.1999. 3.6N3030/1 - Erection of a single storey rear kitchen extension. Approved. 03.12.1981. 3.7N3030 - Alterations to bungalow to provide new roof and bathroom extension (in accordance with amended plans received by the Council on 23rd November 1976). Approved. 16.12.1976.”

Officer report

Main concerns raised

Objections concerned the enlarged roof, Green Belt impact, historic volume calculations, overlooking, overshadowing, loss of privacy and effects on the neighbouring cottage.

“objection comments submitted on this application are a duplicate to the previous application • Disagrees with the parish councils comments Objections: • The increased height of this, already much developed, cottage will be detrimental to the rural appearance of the local environment • It will allow individuals in the development to overlook local, private gardens • Continued development is disproportionate in this location • The previous applications (P24/00294/HH) refusal…”

“This comparison to ‘trade’ a single storey rear extension Permitted Development volume with a significant roof raise volume increase Planning Application in the Green Belt is flawed • The PD creates substantial additional living space at the rear and would cause less harm to the visual and spatial openness of the Green Belt compared with the substantial roof uplift option • The roof was replaced in 1976 to become a single storey, two- roomed bungalow with attic space above…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent and applicant spoke in support, a resident spoke against, the ward councillor raised objections, and a councillor read the parish council’s statement.

Committee discussion

Members discussed the Green Belt volume increase, the fallback position, neighbouring privacy and a possible obscure-glazing condition.

“The Planning Officer acknowledged that that the volume increase exceeded policy guidance, however, when assessing the proposals impact upon the openness of the Green Belt, and in light of the fallback position, officers concluded that the application should not be refused on the grounds of impact upon the Green Belt.”

“That to protect the amenity of the neighbouring occupiers, officers be granted delegated authority to impose an additional condition requiring the proposed dormer window serving bedroom 4 to be glazed with obscure glass.”

Minutes