Appeal 3294433

The appeal is dismissed.

It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.

The proposed development includes the erection of a first floor extension to an existing bungalow which is sited to the rear of a 2-storey dwelling that fronts [address]. Other dwellings fronting [address] and near-by roads are primarily 2-stories in height rather than being low rise dwellings. The property is located on the edge of [site address] and does not form an integral part of the streetscene. However, would be seen from the road along the access drive.

The increase in the height and scale associate with the proposed rear extension would result in the appearance of a 2-storey dwelling that would reflect the character and size of other dwellings within the surrounding area. By reason of the extended property’s scale, it would be seen from the road and, because of its edge of settlement location the adjacent countryside, which is in the Green Belt, but it would not be so conspicuous so as to amount to an unacceptable visual intrusion. The extended property would be viewed against the context of either other 2-storey dwellings or the trees which afford some filtering of the available views. For these reasons, the appeal scheme would not have an adverse effect on the rural character and openness of the Green Belt and, as such, there would not be a conflict with Policy NH/8 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018 (LP)

However, the design of the proposed extension is not of high quality and is not of the type sought by LP Policy HQ/1. Although a single horizontal window being erected within the front elevation would minimise overlooking and loss of privacy for the neighbouring dwelling, the design of the proposed extension fails to reflect the character and appearance of the host property and other dwellings within the surrounding area. When viewed along the access drive, the front elevation of the proposed extension would have the appearance of an unbroken expanse of cladding. The choice of grey cladding as an external material would not reflect the traditional materials of the host property and those which predominate within the surrounding area.

The appellant has offered to alter the design of the appeal scheme but no alternative proposals have been submitted. In any event, I am required to determine this appeal based upon an assessment of the proposed development.

Although the rural character and openness of the Green Belt would not be materially harmed, this matter is significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the proposed development not being of high quality of design. Accordingly, it is concluded that this appeal should be dismissed because the proposed development would cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area and, as such, it would conflict with LP Policy HQ/1.