Appeal 3276016

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey rear extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00330/FULHH, dated 4 March 2021, and the plans submitted with it (01A/04, 03A/04, 04/04).

At my site visit, I saw that the development has been completed and I note that the application has been submitted retrospectively. I am also aware that there is a disputed outbuilding on the site, however it is not shown on the plans before me and is not for consideration. I have dealt with the appeal on this basis, although I have deleted the wording “retention of” from the description as it is not an act of development.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the dwelling and surrounding area.

The appeal site relates to a semi-detached, two-storey dwelling with off-street parking spaces to the front, sited on [address]. The property abuts the local primary school, with the wider surrounding area being predominantly residential in nature.

The proposed extension has a flat roof and adjoins an existing single storey rear element. It is visible from the public highway across the car park of the primary school, with its upper portion evident behind a brick wall that forms the boundary between the house and school. _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________

I consider that the enlargement reflects the scale and proportions of the existing property. It visually connects with the overall appearance of the dwelling, without dominating it or resulting in an overdevelopment of the site. It is of an appropriate design and its size would not materially reduce the amount of private garden area available at the rear of the dwelling. Given the urban context with the school's car park to the fore and the considerable variety of built form within the streetscene, the addition would assimilate without causing undue harm to the spatial quality of the area.

The Council asserts that the scheme is of poor build quality, however I have not been provided with any specific evidence that the structure is deficient in this regard. In any event, this would be likely to be a matter for the Building Regulations.

At my site visit I saw that there is internal access from the dwelling into the bathroom; I have been provided with updated plans from the appellant to demonstrate this layout.

I conclude that the proposal does not cause an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the dwelling and surrounding area. Consequently it complies with the requirements of policies LLP1, LLP19 and LLP25 of the Luton Local Plan November 2017, which seek to ensure proposals relate to surrounding development, meet high standards of design and protect the character of an area. The appeal scheme is also consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which states that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development.

I have considered the imposition of conditions in light of advice in Planning Policy Guidance and the Framework. The development is complete and therefore the standard time limit and plans condition are no longer necessary. I am satisfied that no conditions are required.

Having regard to all matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.