# The Rising Rest Home, Primrose Lane, Simmondley, Glossop

- **Decision:** dismissed, 4 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: J Buxton
- **Authority:** High Peak (East Midlands)
- **Appeal reference:** 6011027
- **Application reference:** HPK/2025/0423
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Single storey side extension to residential care home (communal, sanitary and office space)
- **Site context:** inside-settlement
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** DP3(1)
- **Development plan policies:** High Peak Local Plan 2016 S1, EQ6, High Peak Design Guide
- **Main issues:** character and appearance
- **Tags:** tier-2, design-refusal, dp3-3-not-applied-as-refusal, care-home, transitional-no-consultation

## Summary
A care-home side extension, dismissed on design grounds. The roof form and fenestration were awkward, and the extension would widen the building in public views. The inspector used DP3(1) language ("integrate with or enhance") without naming the policy. The harm was weighed in a balance: "substantial" adverse effects against "significant" weight for operational benefits (DL ¶9, 14, 17). DP3(3) "should be refused" was not used as a trump.

## What made the difference
Poor architectural relationship to the host building. "the fact that a design may successfully fulfil a functional purpose does not necessarily mean that it represents good design" (DL ¶15).

## Policy findings
- **DP3(1): fail (substantial weight).** dual-pitched roof and fenestration do not relate to host; "does not integrate with or enhance either the host building or its surroundings" (DP3(1) language, policy not named); adverse effects "substantial"; balance run against significant-weight benefits — no DP3(3) "should be refused" wording (DL 7-9, 17); code mapped by harvester
- **HO9: benefit (significant weight).** care-home operational, infection-control and accessibility improvements; "efficient use of the land" (DL 6, 14, 17); code mapped by harvester

## Key facts
- Extension fills landscaped side buffer between large stone care home and bungalows (DL 5-6)
- Near St James Conservation Area — preserved (DL 13)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6011027
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/9b82e36c-e137-453a-a8ac-bb5c2dddf4f3

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6011027.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.