House extension and garage at 3 North Field, Newby Bridge, Ulverston

“Planning permission is now sought for a redesigned two-storey extension to the front of house and construction of a detached garage and associated site works.”

“The existing porch and single-storey projection on the south-east elevation would be replaced with the proposed two-storey extension. The design of the proposed extension has been amended by removing the built form to the south-west corner of the existing dwelling leaving the proposed extension limited to the central and north-eastern side of the front elevation.”

“North Field comprises a cluster of three houses in an open countryside location, accessed from a private driveway off the A592 just to the north of the A590 roundabout at Newby Bridge. To the west, the grounds slope down to the southern end of Windermere as it narrows to form the River Leven. North Field is the most northerly of the three houses and takes the form of a bungalow but has some accommodation in the roof space.”

“Earlier this year, planning permission was refused for a two-storey extension to the front of house and construction of a detached garage and associated site works (application reference 7/2025/5185) for the following reason:”

“Due to the orientation and relationship between existing buildings, the scale and proximity of the proposed two-storey extension would reduce the light into the north-eastern elevations and rear gardens of 1 and 2 North Field. The ground floor window on the south-western elevation of the proposed extension would result in views into the ground floor windows on the north-eastern elevation of 1 North Field, resulting in loss of privacy.”

“The proposals are in accordance with the spatial strategy set out in Policy 02 and are acceptable in principle. The main issues are:”

“Impact on the character and appearance of the area • Impact on the amenity of neighbours…”

“Staveley-in -Cartmel Parish Council objects to the planning application on the following grounds: • The proposed extension to the front of the house would not have been possible without a previous unauthorised activity. The central argument used to apply for that retrospective permission was for the claimed need to provide space for access and turning by emergency vehicles. The new planned new development suggests doubts about the validity of that argument.”

“Windermere and Bowness Town Council have no objections because the revised application addresses the impact on neighbours and the height of the property that previously caused concern.”

“There is one window proposed at ground-floor level on the south-western elevation of the proposed extension to serve a hallway. This window would be approximately 8m from the rear garden boundary, 12m from the rear elevation of 1 North Field, and approximately 9m from the rear garden boundary and 13m from the rear elevation of 2 North Field. The existing and proposed plans show a close boarded timber fence on the boundary with 1 & 2 North Field and 3 North Field.”

“Notwithstanding the erection of a close boarded timber fence on the south- western boundary, given the ground-floor positioning of the window together with the sufficient distance from the proposed window to the neighbouring dwellings, I am satisfied that there would not be any unacceptable overlooking towards the neighbouring dwellings.”

“Motion to approve the application with conditions Proposed by [name withheld] by [name withheld] in were unanimously in favour of the motion…”

“The development hereby permitted shall be commenced before the expiration of THREE years from the date hereof.”

“No machinery required to carry out the development hereby approved shall be operated outside the following hours: • 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m Monday – Friday • 9.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m Saturday…”