Appeal 3277300

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for existing carport converted to study, proposed two storey front extension creating new garage and first floor with master bedroom, internal and external alterations, existing driveway and crossover width extended at [site address] , in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 07/21/0291/HF, dated 10 March 2021, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 14222-S001-1st and 14222-P001-A.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing building.

I consider that the main issue in this case is its effect on the character and appearance of the area.

[site address] is a detached, timber clad chalet bungalow set back from the hammer head at the end of a cul-de-sac in an established residential area. The other properties in the street are also detached chalet bungalows, in a variety of materials including brick and timber cladding with tiled roofs. Some have been extended with a variety of dormer windows and single storey extensions.

I consider that the policies relevant in this case are DSC1 and DSC2 of the Broxbourne Local Plan 2018-2033 which require development proposals, including extensions, to take account, among other things, of local character, patterns of development, building lines and forms, and the scale and design of the existing building.

The Council has raised no objection to the proposed conversion of the carport and the widening of the driveway and crossover and I see no reason to disagree with this.

No. 5 has been altered previously, including a one and a half storey side extension. The proposed two storey extension to the front would project approximately 7.4m from the existing building with a gabled roof to a similar height as the existing roof ridge. Although this amounts to a substantial addition, I consider that it would not necessarily appear out of character or scale with the existing building, particularly as the materials would match the existing and the new fenestration would be in proportion.

Although it would project forward of the neighbouring property at No. 3, it would be mostly screened from views along the street by the latter and I consider that it would not have an unduly disruptive effect on the pattern of development along the street. The dwellings follow a staggered building line, but this pattern is visually interrupted by the variety of dormer windows and a number of single storey front extensions, for example at Nos. 2 and 6, and other alterations, most notably the large rendered alterations and extensions to No. 12, which is set forward of its neighbours and prominent in views along the street from the south.

I conclude that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the existing dwelling or wider the street scene and that it is consistent with local plan policies DSC1 and DSC2.

For the reasons given above, the appeal is allowed.

I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council, having regard to the tests set out in the Framework. A condition detailing the plans is necessary to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and for the avoidance of doubt. A condition relating to the materials is necessary in order to ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development.