Single-storey rear extension at 14 Barn Holme, Kendal

What was proposed

The application sought a single-storey flat-roof rear extension replacing the existing conservatory, projecting four metres with render, a fibreglass roof and brown windows and doors.

“SUMMARY 1.1 The householder application seeks permission for a single storey rear extension to replace an existing conservatory. The scale and design of the proposed extension is considered acceptable in relation to the site location context, and the proposal is not anticipated to impact on residential amenity. As such is recommended for approval.”

“THE PROPOSAL 3.1 The application proposes the erection of a single storey flat roof rear extension. It will project 4 m on the NW elevation, with a width of 5.77 m and height of 3 m. The proposed roof light brings the overall roof height to 3.4 m. The extension will be finished in render with a grey GRP fibreglass roof, and brown uPVC doors and windows.”

Officer report

The site and history

The property is a two-storey detached house with a rear garden and existing conservatory; it is neither listed nor in a conservation area.

“SITE DESCRIPTION 4.1 14 Barn Holme is a two storey detached dwelling in Kendal. The property has a driveway to the front and garden to the rear. The dwelling is finished in render, with tiled roof and uPVC windows. There is an existing conservatory on the rear (NW) elevation which the proposed extension is to replace. The property is not listed and is not in a conservation area.”

Officer report

Earlier application

A previous lawful development certificate application for a proposed single-storey rear extension was refused.

“SITE PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 2025/1535/LDPR – Lawful Development Certificate for a proposed single storey rear extension – Refused 16/09/2025”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the extension acceptable in design, scale, visual impact, privacy, overshadowing and biodiversity terms, and recommended approval.

“The proposed flat roof, whilst not consistent with the roof of the existing conservatory to be replaced, nor the roof of the main dwelling, is considered acceptable in this location. The Kendal Town Council objection referenced the flat roof being out of keeping with the surrounding area. However, flat roof rear extensions can be seen on Barn Holme, namely No. Barn Holme.”

“However, in all other regards, in terms of the proposed scale, height and projection, the rear extension would be considered acceptable under permitted development. On the rear and south west boundaries is fencing and on the north elevation there is vegetation which will help reduce view of the extension, though it will be visible above this.”

Officer report

Objections and concerns

The town council objected to the proposal’s scale, dominance and flat roof, while one neighbour raised visual dominance, height and privacy concerns.

“Kendal Town Council 6.1.1 Material objections, due to the scale and dominance of the proposal and the lack of a pitched roof on the design, which is out of keeping with the surrounding area. The Kendal Town Council were informally asked to reconsider the application having been given further information regarding the scale of the proposal and the presence of other flat roof extensions in the surrounding area.”

“REPRESENTATIONS 7.1 The application has been advertised by way of a site notice and neighbour notification to 6 properties. One representation was received as a result of this consultation which raised concerns regarding visual dominance, increased height, and potential loss of privacy. NATIONAL GUIDANCE & RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY”

Officer report

Who took part

The planning officer presented the application, while the member of the public who objected could not attend and submitted a statement.

Members’ discussion

Members were shown site photographs and plans, noted the proposal was outside lawful permitted development, and said the site visit was helpful.

“Members’ attention was drawn to photographs of the site, existing and proposed floor plans and the boundary of the site.”

“Following a query from members, it was noted that the proposals would not fall within the lawful permitted development.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

Members moved and seconded approval, then granted planning permission subject to conditions covering timing, approved plans and materials.

“A motion to approve planning permission was moved and seconded.”

“RESOLVED, that planning permission be granted, subject to the following conditions: -”

Minutes