APPLICATION NUMBER:  25/00341/HOUS

Application Number:  	25/00341/HOUS	
Location:	50 Grasmere Avenue, Heywood, OL10 2DW	
Proposal:	Single storey rear, two storey front and two storey side extensions including application of white render following demolition of existing detached garage.	
Applicant:	Ali	
Case Officer:	Bob Melling	
DETERMINATION DATE 12.06.2025	EXT OF TIME 
25.07.2025	
RECOMMENDATION:	Grant subject to conditions	
			
DELEGATION	Applicant a Council Member or officer?	N	
	Contrary to previous decision?	N	
	Called in or Planning Panel objection?	N	

COMMENTS	Planning Panel comments received?	N
	
	Neighbour comments received?	Y	

CONDITIONS	Pre-commencement conditions proposed?	N	
	Pre-commencement conditions agreed (or notification period expired)?	N/A	

Location

The application relates to no. 50 Grasmere Avenue, a two storey, detached dwelling located in a residential area of Heywood. The application property occupies a corner plot at the junction of Grasmere Avenue and Walton Close. No. 53 Grasmere Avenue is adjacent to the west and there are two blocks of flats adjacent to the northeast. No. 2 Gleneagles Avenue lies directly opposite the application property to the southeast and the rear boundary of the curtilage borders the rear garden of no. 8 Birkdale Close. 

Description of Proposal

Permission is sought for a part two, part single storey side extension, a two storey front extension and a single storey rear extension. The side extension would project approximately 5.32m from the existing side elevation and would be stepped back at first floor level to the front. The two storey front extension would project forward of the existing front door to provide a new front entrance with a large window above at first floor level. The single storey rear extension would project 4m from the existing rear elevation with a width of 11.8m. It would be characterised by a flat roof, large bi-fold doors and a central roof lantern. Materials for construction would including matching brickwork and roof tiles with white render proposed for the single storey rear extension and to the bottom half of the side extension. 

Relevant History

N/A
		
Township/Member comments

N/A

Consultee responses

N/A
 
Representations

Letters of notification were sent to surrounding properties and 1 letter was received which raised concerns about sewage / drainage. 

Officer’s response: This is a minor application for an extension to an existing dwellinghouse. In this instance, the LPA would not be able to substantiate a reason for refusal on the basis of drainage or the impact on associated infrastructure. It should be noted that United Utilities (UU) will not allow building over or in close proximity to a water main or the erection of a new building over or in close proximity to a public sewer or any other wastewater pipeline. However UU advise that proposals to extend domestic properties either above, or in close proximity to a public sewer will be reviewed on a case by case basis by either by a building control professional or following a direct application to UU. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the applicant to liaise directly with UU in order to ensure that pipelines and apparatus are not compromised either during or after construction. An informative will be attached to the decision notice to this effect. 

Policy

National

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 
National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

Sub-Regional

Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan (PfE):

The Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan was adopted and became part of the statutory development plan for each of the 9 authorities covered by the plan on 21st March 2024. The following policies are relevant:

JP-P1 		Sustainable Development

Local

Saved Rochdale Unitary Development Plan (UDP) 2006: 

G/D/1		Defined Urban Area

Adopted Rochdale Core Strategy (CS) 2016: 

The Rochdale Core Strategy was adopted on 19th October 2016. The following policies are relevant: 

P3		Improving Design of New Development
DM1		General Development Requirements
T2		Improving Accessibility 
Appendix 5 	Schedule of Parking Standards

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD): Supplementary Planning Document ‘Guidelines and Standards for Residential Development’ (2016).

Amendments

Amendments were sought to reduce the amount of render and reduce the width of the proposed side extension in order to create a more proportionate design. 

Assessment 

Design: DM1 and P3

•	Policies DM1 and P3 of the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy require development proposals to be ‘of high quality design and take the opportunity to enhance the quality of the area’ and to ‘enhance the borough’s identity and sense of place, by respecting context where it is positive and having regard to the scale, density, massing, height, layout, landscape, materials and access of surrounding buildings and areas in general.’ 
•	The application property is located amid a typical late 20th century housing estate consisting of predominantly large, detached family housing. 
•	Section 5.14 of the SPD explains that side extensions to dwellings on a corner plot can have an unacceptable impact on the street scene by eroding the space around buildings and presenting a hard edge to the public highway. In this instance, however, there is a clear absence of a strong building line and the existing detached garage extends up to the side boundary. Therefore, no concerns are had in this regard. 
•	It is considered that the proposed development would be compatible with the character of the host property in terms of size, height, massing, layout and design, and would appear subordinate to the scale and proportions of the original dwellinghouse. 
•	Although the proposed front extension would introduce a large area of glazing at first floor level, this would not detract from the character of the house and would be similar in width to the existing first floor window. 
•	Moreover, the extension would be finished in brickwork, roof tiles and window frames to match the existing property with white render proposed to the single storey rear extension and to the bottom half of the side extension. The use of render in this way would ensure an appropriate balance between brickwork and render. 
•	The design of the proposal is therefore acceptable and accords with policies DM1 and P3 of the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy, the SPD and the NPPF.
Amenity: DM1 and SPD

•	Policy DM1 of the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy states development proposals should ensure they ‘do not adversely affect the amenity of residents or users through visual intrusion, overbearing impact, overshadowing or loss of privacy.’
•	Section 5.5 of the SPD states ’it is important that single storey extensions are not overbearing and do not result in undue loss of light or privacy for neighbouring occupiers.’
•	The single storey rear extension would have a depth of 4m and would comply with the projection limit set out in Section 5.6 of the SPD when measured from the true rear elevation of no. 52 Grasmere Avenue. Although it would not comply when measured from the rear elevation of the neighbour’s garage, it is noted that this room has only a door to the rear elevation. 
•	It is not considered that the proposed side extension would have an undue impact on any neighbouring dwellings given the comfortable levels of separation with nearby properties, particularly the two blocks of flats to the northeast.
•	All habitable rooms within the application property would receive sufficient natural light and a sufficient garden space of a functional layout would be retained. As such, the proposed works would ensure an acceptable standard of living for existing and future occupiers.
•	The proposal would not unduly impact on the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in accordance with policy DM1 of the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy, the SPD and the NPPF.

Trees

•	The proposals include the removal of one tree from the rear garden of the application property, marked T2 on the proposed site plan. T2 is a small, non-native Windmill Palm located in close proximity to the shared boundary with no. 52 Grasmere Avenue. It is not protected, has limited public visibility and is not of any significant ecological, cultural or historic value or any notable rarity.
•	In addition to the above, it is not considered that protecting the tree in question would result in any reasonable degree of additional public benefit either at present or in the future. 
•	It is recognised that Policy G6 of the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy requires replacement planting at a ratio of 2:1. However, it is also recognised that the tree could be removed presently without any prior consent and in light of the congestion of the rear garden, it is considered that such replanting may be excessive and ultimately harmful to the enjoyment of the rear garden in years to come. As such replacement planting is not considered necessary or reasonable in this instance.
Recommendation:  Grant subject to the following conditions

1.	The development must be begun not later than three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2.	The permission relates to the following plans:

­	SITE PLAN_LOCATION MAP. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-101. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025
­	PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-102. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025
­	PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-103. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025
­	PROPOSED ROOF PLAN. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-104. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025
­	PROPOSED ELEVATIONS. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-105. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025
­	PROPOSED ELEVATIONS. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-106. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025
­	PROPOSED SECTIONS. Dwg no. GA-R00-PR-107. Rev R00. Submitted on 18/07/2025

and the development shall be carried out in accordance with these drawings hereby approved unless otherwise required by the conditions below.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt, and to ensure a satisfactory standard of development in accordance with the policies contained within the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.	The brickwork, roof tiles and window frames used in the construction of the exterior of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing building in colour, form, type, size and texture. 

Reason: In the interests of ensuring a satisfactory visual appearance to the development and in accordance with Policies P3 and DM1 of the adopted Rochdale Core Strategy, Policy JP-P1 of the adopted Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan, and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Article 35 Statement

The Local Planning Authority worked proactively with the applicant to identify various solutions during the application process to ensure that the proposal comprised sustainable development and would improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area and would accord with the development plan. These were incorporated into the scheme and/or have been secured by planning condition.

	Date	Officer	
Report Completed	18/07/2025	Signed: BM	
Authorisation	25/07/2025	Signed: RK	

INFORMATIVES:

1.	It is recommended that the applicant undertakes a survey of any pipelines or utilities crossing the site before beginning any works, including demolition, trial holes or groundworks. If it is discovered that the proposed development will extend either above, or in close proximity to a public sewer or pipeline, then the applicant must contact United Utilities. For more information, please visit the following webpage: https://www.unitedutilities.com/builders-developers/your-development/planning/building-over-or-working-near-our-assets/homeowners-building-over-or-working-near-our-assets/

Report Author Bob Melling