Appeal 3281689

The appeal is allowed and planning permission Ref 18/06068/FU for part two storey part single storey side/rear extension with alterations at [site address] , is varied by deleting condition No 2 and substituting for the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: 430-002 [name]

The external walling materials shall match those existing.

The flat roof of the single storey extension shall not be used as a balcony or terrace area for its lifetime.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification) the windows proposed in the side elevation facing No.[address] shall be glazed with obscure glass to at least level 3 obscurity and thereafter retained as such.

At the time of my site visit, development had commenced and alterations to the roof had been undertaken. I have assessed the appeal accordingly.

The front page of the Leeds Unitary Development Plan 2006 (LUDP) was not submitted with this appeal. At the same time, I have been dealing with another appeal in the Leeds City Council area which referred to Policies GP5 and BD6 of the LUDP and the front cover was submitted with that appeal. I am therefore satisfied that I have the correct development plan policies before me in which to make a decision.

The proposal seeks to vary condition 2 to allow alterations to the roof that has been built up and appears as a gable element to the front that projects up from the eaves line. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

The area surrounding the appeal site is characterised predominantly by residential properties of various designs and architectural detailing. The roof forms in the area are mixed with numerous different styles including roofs with gable ends, hipped roofs and roofs with dormer style windows of various sizes and positions. It is this variation of different roof forms and styles that contributes to the character of the surrounding area.

The appeal property makes up a pair of semi-detached houses. The proposal does unbalance the symmetry of the pair of semi-detached properties however, there are numerous examples of semi-detached properties in the immediate area that are not balanced due to alterations including roof extensions. The unbalanced appearance of the appeal property and its attached neighbour, in the context of its surroundings, does not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding area.

The proposal does not follow the eaves line of the main property and is a more complicated roof form than the roof of the main property as well as that what was approved in the original planning application1. Given the variation in the surrounding roof forms, the proposal is not an incongruous feature that looks out of place.

Accordingly, the proposal is not harmful to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. The proposal accords with Policy P10 of the Leeds Local Plan Core Strategy 2019, saved Policies GP5 and BD6 of the LUDP, Policy HDG1 of the Leeds Local Development Framework Householder Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2012 and the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks all extension, additions, and alterations to respect the scale, form, proportions, character and appearance of the main dwelling and the locality.

Condition 1 is the modified condition that is subject of this appeal and relates to the modified plans as submitted. This condition is necessary in the interests of certainty. As development has commenced the standard timescale condition is not necessary. At the time of my site visit, there was no certainty that the development was fully completed therefore it is relevant and necessary to impose conditions relating to materials in the interests of character and appearance of the area. In the interests of living conditions of neighbouring occupiers I attach conditions relating to flat roof areas and obscure glazing. 1 Local Planning Authority Reference: 18/06068/FU

I therefore conclude, for the reasons given above, that the planning permission should be varied.