Appeal 3274357

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a first floor side extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00752/FUL, dated 9 March 2021, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces and roof of the extension hereby permitted shall match those of the existing dwelling.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: D 281116-A dated 28 May 2020.

In my formal decision above I have taken the description of development from the decision notice and the appeal form.

The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area, having particular regard to the effect on the [address] street scene.

The appeal property is a two storey end of terrace dwelling located in a residential area to the east of Harrogate. The regular layout of the terraced rows grouped around narrow cul de sacs, the space to side and front boundaries and the mature street trees and hedge planting contribute to the spacious and established character of the street scene. Due to its corner location, position set at right angles to the road and the slight fall in ground levels along the road, the appeal property is visible from longer distances when approaching along [address] from the north-west and south-east.

The appeal property has a single storey extension to the side facing the [address] frontage. Due to its height and maturity, the privet hedge on the road frontage provides a degree of screening so that from longer distances, the extension’s hipped roof appears as the predominant feature in the street scene.

The proposed first floor extension would be constructed above the single storey side extension. Its hipped roof form, detailing and materials would match those of the host property. The roof ridge would be slightly set down from the ridge line of the host property and the front and rear walls would be slightly set back from the existing walls. For these reasons, the original form of the host property would remain intact and the extension would appear as a subordinate addition which would be in keeping with its character and appearance.

The extension would result in additional bulk at first floor level and would be set forward of the front elevation of No [address] (No 13). However, there would be sufficient separation distance to ensure that it would not appear cramped or overly dominant in relation to No 13. The regularity of the terraced rows around the cul de sac together with the existing gap to the road boundary would be maintained and the privet hedge would be retained. The use of render would match the host dwelling and would not look out of place in the context of surrounding properties, some of which also have rendered walls. For these reasons, the proposed extension would not appear unduly prominent or conspicuous in the street scene and would not be harmful to its spacious and verdant character.

In coming to this view, I have also had regard to the presence of other two storey side extensions in the vicinity of the appeal site which I was able to see at my site visit, including No 7 [name] and No [address], both of which occupy corner locations.

Whilst the proposal does not fully accord with the advice in the [name] and [name] (2005) that extensions on corner plots should be set back from the adjacent building line, each case has to be considered on its merits. For the reasons outlined above, I have found that the proposal would be sympathetic to the character and appearance of the host property and would not be harmful to the [address] street scene.

I conclude that the proposal would accord with Policy HP3 of the Harrogate Local Plan (2020) (LP) in so far it requires new development to respect the spatial qualities of the area including the scale, appearance and use of spaces about and between buildings. It would also accord with LP Policy HS8 in so far as it requires that extensions should have no adverse impact on the character and appearance of the dwelling or the surrounding area. The proposal would also comply with the aim of the National Planning Policy Framework to achieve good design as a key aspect of sustainable development.

A condition is required to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. In the interests of the character and appearance of the area, a condition specifying matching materials is also necessary.

For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.