Appeal 3293424

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the street scene, including the effect on the [site address] Conservation Area (CA).

The proposal is for a two storey front extension, single storey side extension and large dormer on the rear facing roofslope of No 9, a detached dwelling on the northern side of [site address] Road. The latter two elements of the proposal – the side extension and rear dormer – were granted planning permission by the Council in February 2021 together with a modest single storey front porch1. The appeal is thus effectively for the first element - a projecting two storey front extension across about half the width of the front elevation with a forward facing gable and duo-pitched roof. This would provide a porch at ground floor level and a larger bedroom on the first floor.

No 9 is an Edwardian house forming part of the frontage development which grew up along either side of the old road between [site address] and [name] prior to the more recent expansion of the town. The frontages form part of the [site address] CA and comprise a mixture of building types including 19th century and later terraced housing with some semi-detached dwellings such as Nos 5 and 7 on one side of No 9 and individual properties such as Nos 11 and 11a, an older perhaps Georgian cottage and late Victorian house, on the other.

However, amongst the variety in the vicinity of the site there is a consistent feature of straightforward pitched roofs, uncluttered front elevations and small front porches. There are no examples of two storey front projections with 1 Application 20/02218/HHFUL gables, and even taking account of the specific location of the dwelling and its set-back from the road, in this context the proposal would appear unduly incongruous and out of place. The existing property fits harmoniously within the street scene and does not require further visual interest or any distinction from the adjacent semi-detached houses.

The appellant draws attention to three permitted extensions to front elevations within the CA, but these are some distance away and not comparable. No 124 [site address] Road lies within a modern group of houses just outside the CA, No 77 [site address] Road is a one-off house between two roads and No [address], whilst an enlargement, only includes a modest front porch2.

For these reasons the proposal would significantly harm the character and appearance of the street scene and would not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the [site address] CA. This would conflict with Policies LP11, LP12 and LP34 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 2019 which require proposals to respond positively to their context, to successfully integrate with adjoining buildings and to at least preserve the character and appearance of the [site address] CA. It would also conflict with the legislative requirement within a CA to give special attention to that objective.

Having regard to the above the appeal should be dismissed.