Appeal 3263217

The appeal is dismissed.

The planning application was submitted in outline with all matters reserved except for layout and access. I have had regard to the block, location, floor and elevation drawings ([name] PL04) but have treated each element of the drawing as indicative, apart from the details of the layout and access, when considering the likely impact of the proposal on the matters set out in the main issues below.

In its [name] and Statement of Case, the Council has raised concerns with respect to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, particularly in respect of outlook. However, the details of the scale and appearance of the proposed dwelling are purely indicative. With this in mind, I have determined the appeal only in relation to the concerns identified on the Decision Notice.

The main issues are: - • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings; and • whether suitable living conditions would be provided for future occupiers of the proposed house, with regard to daylight and sunlight.

The appeal site is situated within a predominantly residential area and concerns the northern end of the rear garden of [site address] , the length and width of which is typical of those to the north of the road. Given that the site would be served by the existing access at the rear taken from [address], it would have a closer relationship with and be experienced in the context of existing houses in that street. Moreover, [address] is formed of pairs and terraces of houses, with hard and soft landscaped frontages. The mid-terrace plots are narrower than end-terraced plots and those associated with the semi-detached houses, as these are set in more spacious grounds with side gardens.

The layout of the proposal would leave around one metre of space to either side of the house. [name] accept that the width of the existing garden means that a single house would be likely to fill the majority of its width, it is not implicit that this would be acceptable within its context. Moreover, in this case, the proposal would be conspicuous as a cramped form of development that would be in contrast to the neighbouring houses in [address].

For this reason, I conclude that the proposed development would have a significantly detrimental effect on the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings. Hence, the proposal would not accord with the design aims of Policy EN4 of the [name] (the CS).

The site is oriented on approximately a southwest-northeast axis. The eastern boundary is marked by a tall and dense evergreen hedge, while to the west is a close boarded fence. In the neighbouring garden beyond the fence are several tall mature deciduous trees.

The main parties have not provided sun path information for summer and winter months. However, it is likely that there would be some overshadowing of the proposed garden areas and less daylight within parts of the proposed house in the early and latter periods of the day, particularly when the deciduous trees are in leaf.

Nevertheless, based on the evidence before me, given that these effects would be likely to be limited for the remainder of the day, I conclude that suitable living conditions would be provided for future occupiers of the proposed house, with regard to daylight and sunlight. Hence, the proposal would accord with the aims expressed in Policy EN4 of the CS in this respect.

I accept that the proposed house would be within the development limits of the town, that it could be of a sustainable design and energy efficient construction and that access and parking arrangements would comply with highway standards. Nonetheless, these matters would weigh neither for nor against the appeal scheme.

[name] have not found harm in relation to the living conditions of future occupiers of the proposed development, I have identified significant harm to character and appearance of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, for the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should not succeed.