No 80 Victoria Road is completely swathed in plastic sheeting

No 80 Victoria Road is completely swathed in plastic sheeting. The next door neighbours at No 82 (on the right) said a proposed first floor extension would result in “loss of light“. The Planning Inspector disagrees and has overruled the Vale of Glamorgan Council’s decision to withhold planning permission.

A planning application for a further extension to one of the largest houses in Penarth – which had been refused by the Vale of Glamorgan Council – has been allowed by Planning Inspectorate –  overturning the Vale Council decision.

The house is No 80 Victoria  Road – a prominent detached house sited opposite Stanwell School playing fields.

In November last year planning permission was granted for a “two storey extension and modifications to all elevations”.  Major renovation works have now been under way for some time at the property – which can’t be seen from the road because of the temporary plastic sheet screening it from view .

No 80 Victoria Road as it was before the redvelopment began. No 80 Victoria Road as it was before the redvelopment began.

No 80 Victoria Road as it was before the redevelopment began.

Last month however a further planning application was made to install a “First floor bedroom extension above existing garage” (as per the illustration above)   . It is this planning application which the council had refused –  but which the Planning Inspectorate has now permitted.

The proosal to add a bedroom above the existing garage at 80 Victoria Road has been refused by Vale planners

The proposal to add a bedroom above the existing garage at 80 Victoria Road had been refused by Vale planners but has been permitted by the Planning Inspectorate

In refusing the application the Vale Council had asserted that  “The proposed extension by reason of its scale and siting, on the primary elevation represents an unsympathetic addition to the existing dwelling house that would result in visual harm to the character of the wider street scene and the host dwelling.

The Vale Council also declared that “By reason of its size, siting and proximity to neighbouring properties, it is considered that the proposal represents an overbearing and insensitively sited form of development, which would unacceptably impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers with particular reference to number 82 Victoria Road. “

The Planning Inspector has disagreed. He says he considers that the proposed extension will have an acceptable presence”  and “would not harm the street scene’s character or appearance.” 

The neighbours at No 82 Victoria Road - a house originally designed to echo features of No 80 Victoria Rd - said the first floor extention would result in loss of light to their property - and loss of privacy

The neighbours at No 82 Victoria Road (above)  – a house originally designed to echo features of No 80 Victoria Rd – said the proposed first floor extension above No 80 ‘s garage would result in loss of light to their property – and loss of privacy.

The ruling also knocked-back claims that the extension would cause “loss of light ” to the neighbouring house No 82 Victoria Road and that it would be “overbearing and insensitively sited in relation to No 82” .

The Planning Inspector pointed out that the majority of the extension would be alongside the garage and covered parking bay belonging to No 82 and that, whilst windows in the
forward part of the side elevation of No 82 would face the rear part of the extension’s side elevation, there would be little or no loss of light and  no loss of privacy.

The inspector said he was also of the view that “the proposal pays regard to the context
of the local built environment and satisfactorily complements the local character of buildings and open spaces.”

When the plastic sheeting is eventually removed local residents will be able to assess whether the Planning Inspector is right .


About NewsNet

Penarth Daily News email address dmj@newsnet.uk . Penarth Daily News is an independent free on-line fair and balanced news service published by NewsNet Ltd covering the town of Penarth in the Vale of Glamorgan, Wales, UK. All our news items are based on the information we receive or discover at the time of publication and are published on the basis that they are accurate to the best of our knowledge and belief at that time.
This entry was posted in Penarth Daily News. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Paul says:

    “A planning application for a further extension to one of the largest houses in Penarth – which had been refused by the Vale of Glamorgan Council – has been allowed by Planning Inspectorate – overturning the Vale Council decision.”

    Well of course he did, he hasn’t gotta live there. Its all there in black n white. Shake on it…

  2. Tom says:

    How much space do people need?

  3. sjleworthy says:

    after the legal to’ings and fro’ings it’s all most subjective. As mentioned, how much money do people want to spend?

    personally speaking, the style these days for mix and match architecture is most strange on a street. look at the Cliffs – the mini golf course end of Plymouth Road and Whitcliffe Drive for instance – tons of cash pilled into streets of most miss-matched housing and some god-awful architecture. great big huge white boxes.

    • Dave says:

      Always makes me laugh walking along the clifftops looking at those disgustingly ugly houses, especially the ones where they’ve added on at the side – usually where the garage was – so now all you get is a long parade of boxes jammed together with no room to move your elbows, and ll looking the same. Painted white (check) chrome and glass Juliet balconies (check) big window for the sea ‘voo’ (check) bi-fold doors (check). Just imagine all the work involved in pulling them apart in 20 or so years time when they look as dated as 70s’ corner baths.

  4. Eyes and Ears says:

    How much time do we worry about things that don’t concern us? (Yes I see the irony of my own comment)

    • Martin says:

      Actually, I think this sort of thing should concern us – or at least anyone with any sense that the town’s aesthetics have some value. It’s not especially clever to imply it’s the preserve of busybodies to comment on matters such as this. If nobody keeps tabs on it, the barbarians will run riot, building eyesores to expand their empire.

  5. Paul says:

    I think it is great news that they have had the panning accepted as that is the dream house that they Have wanted to build and live in.

    As for the space, I believe that if someone wants a lot of space then there quite untitled to have that. If you have the money to spend then spend it..

    I’m glad that these people have finally got what they want.

    • Richard says:

      People “getting what they want” is part of the problem of modern society. There is no modesty or humility anymore, no restraint. It’s every man for himself and **** everyone else.

  6. Anonymous says:

    If only the Vale of Glamorgan council put as much time and effort into worrying about the park and leisure facilities for the younger generation in Penarth and not an extra bedroom maybe we would have a nicer area for our children.
    This newly developed property will be much better on the eyes than what was there before, yes it will look modern in comparison but the whole road is full of mismatched looking houses.
    Pleased for the owners that they have finally had the planning granted. If they are lucky enough to have the money to spend and enjoy the space, that’s great news!
    I’m actually enjoying the plastic sheeting obstructing the building work as it seems to keep all that are concerned on their toes. Let’s hope they have an open coffee morning for everyone to look around when it’s complete.

    • Hamish Munnypenny says:

      Planning is a different department to Parks and Recreation, so the qualified personnel are not interchangeable. This invalidates the case you are trying to make. Each department has its own responsibilities, and to suggest that if the planners were directed to conduct themselves less assiduously it might somehow improve the performance of any other department is just a fatuous non sequitur.
      Planners have guidelines to follow and execute, but budgets are decided by elected members, so your criticism should be directed wholly at councillors, not at the staff of the planning department, who are governed by regulations.

  7. Anonymous says:

    I take your comments on board. Thank you for pointing that out.

    The planning department must have different guidelines to follow then if two different employee’s can make two different decisions.

    I’m looking forward to seeing the finished result and the drama it will stir up!

    • Hamish Munnypenny says:

      As must be obvious to you now, the guidelines are open to interpretation. Often planners have to consider one rule against another and find compromise. I’m glad you are taking this on board and beginning to appreciate how difficult it is to please everybody, especially when planners are likely to be expected to help plant flowers and save trees around the Vale.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Question for all the negative people on here? What part of your lives is this going to affect that they have finally got the planning that they wanted? What is wrong with someone having money and a lot of it as well? In my eyes some people are pathetic…

  9. Ivor Bagman says:

    Why can’t a man
    Do what he wants
    With the land
    That he owns ?
    Keep your noses out !
    Put your rubbish out
    On the right day !
    Do something constructive !

    • Kidby says:

      Thank you for your comments Ivor and seeing a positive side!

      My question to those with a negative attitude, if you were able to build and develop your own property in that area would you build a small one?? A house built for a church mouse would probably stand out just as much in this street!

      We look forward to moving into the house of our dreams.
      No 80 Victoria Road.

      • John Silverdale says:

        I hope your extension goes up smoothly. I think it is a welcome addition of value and should be encouraged as it benefits future developments and uplifts the housing stock. Don’t listen to the nay-sayers on here. They live in their own drab world of inactivity and backwardness.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s