Appeal 3294057

The appeal is dismissed.

The appellant’s name differs on the application form and the appeal form but the appellant has clarified this and I have referred to his correct name above.

I consider that the main issues are the effect of the proposed extension on (1) the living conditions of the occupiers of No [address]; and (2) trees.

The appeal site is a detached house and at the time of my site the conservatory had already been demolished and some building work had commenced. The rear garden of No [address] adjoins the side boundary of No 7 so the outlook from the rear of No 10 would be directly at the side wall of the proposed extension. No 10’s garden is relatively modest in depth so the extension would be prominent.

Core Strategy1 Policy S10 seeks to achieve the highest level of sustainable design, amongst other things. Local Plan2 policy E20 requires the design of development to ensure adequate standards of privacy, daylight and sunlight and Policy H18 refers to the effect of extensions to dwellings on adjoining properties. The Council SPD3 for residential extensions provides further guidance, in particular, where rear extensions can cause a loss of outlook, overshadowing or have an overbearing impact. The SPD also provides recommended separation distance between properties.

In this case, No 7 is located to the west of No 10 and so any overshadowing is likely to be late in the day and relatively minor given the existing effect of buildings and trees. However, a two storey extension so close to the boundary would appear overbearing and due to the scale and height of the proposal, it would have a detrimental impact on the outlook from No 10’s rear windows and garden. It would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of No [address] and conflict with the objectives of the policies and SPD referred to.

There are trees to the north and north-west of the appeal site that are protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO)4. One tree, a mature Sycamore, is located close to the boundary with the appeal site so that its canopy extends over the rear garden area. An Arboricultural Assessment has been submitted but the Council consider that it is lacking in detail in relation to the impact of the proposal on the tree.

Core Strategy Policy BN3 broadly relates to woodland enhancement and creation and indicates the Council’s support for woodland and trees. The National Planning Policy Framework5 also supports conserving and protecting the natural environment. The submitted report indicates that some pruning would be required to the tree and barriers would be required to protect its rooting area. The report concludes that the works are considered acceptable. The Council are clearly dissatisfied with the level of the information submitted.

From my observations, the tree is very close to the boundary and its root system is likely to be close to the proposed extension. Work has already taken place which may or may have not affected the tree. In any case, I have no evidence that appropriate measures could not be taken to avoid harmful damage to the tree but to be clear, this matter would need to be further addressed should the scheme be otherwise acceptable.

I have found that the two storey extension would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of No [address] due to its 1 [name] Local Plan (Part 1), Adopted – December 2014. 2 Northampton Borough Council Northampton Local Plan 1993-2006, [name] 1997 [name]. [name]. 3 Northamptonshire Borough Council Residential Extensions and Alterations Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document, [name] 2011 (SPD). 4 Northampton Borough Council Tree Preservation Order No. 123: [address], [address]. 5 Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government National Planning Policy Framework, 2021 (the Framework). scale, height and proximity. It would conflict with the Council’s policies and SPD referred to above. Regarding the TPO tree, it would seem to me that further details are required that clarify exactly what measures could be taken to protect the tree and ensure no long term harm, especially given the work that has already been carried out.

I note that the Council refer to the emerging Local Plan6 and indicate that it has been before its Full Council (18 January 2021) and submitted to the Secretary of State for examination. No further update has been provided and I consider that I am able to determine the appeal on the basis of the approved development plan documents. No matters have been raised which would contradict this. I have considered all other matters raised but none alter my conclusion.

I conclude that the proposal would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of No [address] and therefore the appeal fails.