Appeal 3280210

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of a part single/ part two storey side extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2021/742, dated 20 April 2021, subject to the following conditions:

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 approved plan 10STANSTEAD/PA001.

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

The description of development used above is taken from the Council’s decision notice, as this more accurately describes the proposed development.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and the area.

The appeal site is in a predominantly residential area where properties on the northern side of [address] vary in their design and character. The appeal property is, however, similar in character to [address] to the east, and both formed part of a larger development of 11 dwellings. Within this part of the street, the front building lines of the properties are staggered and the extent of gaps between the properties varies.

The gap which currently exists between the appeal property and its neighbour, [address], is larger than the majority of other gaps which exist between properties in this part of the street. The gap provides a view towards the foliage in the rear garden and part of a building on [address] behind. However, the gap is partially obscured by existing fencing and by the side extensions and garage to No 12. Due to the staggered building lines of the properties, the gap is visible from directly in front of the appeal site but is not perceivable in longer views along the street.

While the proposed development would result in the loss of the existing gap, I consider that this particular gap does not make an important contribution to the overall character of the area. By reason of the subordinate design of the proposed extension, including its width and stepped down ridgeline, the plot would not appear unduly cramped. Similarly, due to the neighbouring extensions against the boundary, and the lowered ridge height and hipped roof of the extension, the development would not result in visual terracing with the neighbouring property, which is of different character.

The development would result in reduced symmetry with No 8 which is currently similar in its appearance. However, as the extension respects the design of the host property and appears subordinate, and in light of the varied character of the wider area, some loss of symmetry would not be harmful.

For these reasons I find that the development proposed would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the host property or the area. The development would comply with Policy CSP18 of the Tandridge District Core Strategy 2008 and Policy DP7 of the Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: [name] 2014, which together require a high standard of design that reflects and respects local context and distinctiveness.

The development proposed would also comply with policies CCW4 and CCW5 of the Caterham, Chaldon and Whyteleafe Neighbourhood Plan June 2021, insofar as they require development to preserve and enhance the character area and demonstrate high quality design.

I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council and I have had regard to the advice in Planning Practice Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework in respect of conditions. I have imposed a condition requiring the development to adhere to the submitted drawings to provide clarity for the parties, and also a condition to ensure the development is constructed using materials to match the host property to preserve the character of the property and the area.

The development would comply with the development plan as a whole and the appeal should be allowed.