Appeal 3282533

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the outbuilding to rear garden at [site address] , Bradford [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/03429/HOU, dated 26 June 2021, subject to the following condition:

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan 1008IHa, Site Plan 1008IH05, Elevations and [name] 1008IH06.

The outbuilding has been completed therefore I am considering this appeal retrospectively.

The main issue is the effects of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the appeal site.

The development the subject of this appeal comprises a stone faced outbuilding with a mono-pitched tiled roof which is situated to the end of the rear garden of no. [site address] . It occupies the entire width of the garden of the two storey semi-detached property which is faced with part render and part brick under a hipped tiled roof.

The surrounding area is wholly residential, comprising semi-detached dwellings of similar design and materials to the host property. The outbuilding is not visible from the street scene and I acknowledge that the Council do not cite harm to the character of the area.

The outbuilding has been constructed from different materials to the host property, however it does not detract from the house nor dominate the site. This is as a result of the distance of the outbuilding from the main dwelling, which retains a good sized rear garden despite the relatively large footprint of the outbuilding. I noted on my site visit that whilst the majority of buildings nearby are faced with render or pebbledash and brick, there are examples of stone and artificial stone buildings and boundary features in the locality.

I was directed to such an example at no. [address]. Although it was difficult to view the rear of the site, I have had regard to the plans and officer report supplied in respect of the outbuilding in this location. I note that no. 4 has a smaller and more irregularly shaped rear garden than the appeal site before me and the outbuilding lies in closer proximity to its neighbours. I find that the appeal before me has less visual impact on both the host property and its neighbours than that at no. 4.

Consequently, I find that the development relates satisfactorily to the setting of the host dwelling, and that it is not a discordant nor incongruous addition which results in any significant harm to the character and appearance of the appeal site. It is in broad compliance with Bradford District Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2017) Policies DS1 and DS3 which seek to achieve high quality design which is appropriate to the context of the site.

The use of the building is proposed for household storage. If it were to be used for commercial purposes this would be subject to a separate planning application. If hazardous substances are being stored which are not incidental to the use of the dwelling, this would also be controlled by other legislation.

I do not find there to be any harmful effects in relation to overlooking, loss of light, noise and disturbance. This is by virtue of the height of the building, the location of the windows and presence of boundary features, together with distance from neighbouring dwellings. There are a number of trees to the rear of the outbuilding which I understand are located within a neighbour’s garden. If any trees or shrubs have already been removed to facilitate the development this is not a matter which I am able to consider as part of this appeal.

Given that the outbuilding has already been constructed no time limit or materials conditions are necessary. Only a condition requiring adherence with the approved plans is necessary, for the avoidance of doubt.

The appeal is allowed.