Garage and rear extension at 1 Pennyman Way, Middlesbrough

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for a rear single-storey extension and a pitched-roof detached garage at the front or side.

“Proposal: Retrospective erection of detached garage to side and single storey extension…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The property is a semi-detached single-storey dwelling on the boundary of two roads in an established residential area.

“The application property is a single-storey semi-detached dwelling with a detached single storey garage to the side/rear. It is located within an established residential area comprising predominantly of semi-detached single storey properties, although some detached dwellings are evident. These are generally set back from the road. The property sits on the boundary with Pennyman Way and High Rifts.”

“-Rear single storey extension (projecting 3.2m from the rear wall with a width of 3.6m and height of 2.9m)”

Officer report

Earlier applications and changes

An earlier garage application was refused, while the dormer was removed from this proposal because of its design, scale and character impacts.

“Refused for the following reason: In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed garage by reason of its design, appearance, position and scale would result in a dominant addition which fails to respect the character and appearance of the host property and street scene. The proposal is therefore deemed contrary with Local Plan Policies DC1 and CS5.”

“24/0283/CLD - Certificate of lawful development for single storey extension to rear, dormer window to rear and rooflights to front – APPROVE - 23/08/2024. Current dormer as built does not comply with permitted development allowances and so does not adhere to the details submitted with the Certificate of lawful development.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the reduced garage and removed dormer would avoid significant harm to the property, street scene and neighbours.

“This application follows a previous refusal for the erection of a detached garage which was of notable height and was to be rendered. This element has now been amended and is of a reduced height, comprising brickwork to the front elevation.”

“Taking into account the removal of the dormer proposal and the reduced height of the garage, this would on balance not harmfully dominate the host property or wider street scene and would also have no significant detrimental impact on adjacent properties. Whilst there would be some impact, it would not be so significant as to warrant refusal of the scheme.”

Officer report

Objections and parish view

Ten objections raised concerns about appearance, scale, overdevelopment, overlooking, privacy and ongoing works, while the parish council opposed the application.

“-Development not in keeping -Inappropriate height and scale in the street -Garage out of proportion with host dwelling -Prominent development -Overbearing -Overlooking -Loss of privacy -Amendments to garage have not overcome previous concerns -Overdevelopment -Ongoing works on site…”

“Pennyman Way is semi-detached bungalow occupying a corner site with High Rifts. An application 25/0315/FUL for retrospective planning for a detached garage was refused earlier this year on the grounds that its design, appearance, position and scale would result in a dominant addition which fails to respect the character and appearance of the host property and street scene.”

Officer report

Who spoke at the meeting

The applicant spoke in support, and a resident spoke against the application, raising concerns about the garage’s prominence, size, proximity and effects.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed possible restrictions, access rights, the garage’s increased length and the progress of works; one member remained uncomfortable with its dimensions.

“Members discussed the possibility of applying of restrictions and also discussed access rights. It was clarified that certain restrictions were already in place.”

“A Member queried how much larger the proposed garage was to that previously submitted. It was clarified that the size of the length of the garage had increased from approximately five meters to eight meters.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application subject to the report’s conditions and an additional condition restricting the garage’s use.

“A Member commented that when taken in totality they were not comfortable with the increased dimensions of the garage.”

“ORDERED that the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed in the report and an additional condition restricting the use of the garage.”

Minutes

Conditions attached

The permission included conditions covering approved plans, materials, drainage, flat-roof use and obscure, restricted glazing to the first-floor side window.

“Materials - Approved Details The development hereby approved shall be carried out in complete accordance with the external finishing materials detailed in the approved plans, or in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.”

“Windows - Opaque and Restricted The first-floor side (gable) window hereby approved must be opaque glazed to a minimum of level 3 and must be restricted opening at a height of 1.7m from the internal floor level. The opaque glazing and restricted opening must be implemented on installation and retained for the lifetime of the building.”

Officer report