Appeal 3294807

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey front extension, a two storey side extension and internal alterations to the existing dwelling at [site address] , Wootton, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/02987/FUL, dated 12 November 2021, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08A, 09A, and 10.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

I have taken the description of the proposal from the application form, other than the reference to the ‘revised scheme’ as that is not an act of development.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

Nos 20 to 34 (evens) [address] comprise a small cohesive group of semi-detached two storey properties with gabled main roofs, and whose walls are finished in red brick. They are set back from the remainder of [address] around front gardens and landscaping, with a central footpath linking them to the highway. Consequently, they form a discrete enclave separate from the remainder of the [address] streetscene.

As a result of this scheme, the gap at first floor level to the neighbouring semi-detached property at No 30 would be reduced. However, according to the appellant’s calculations there would still be a distance of just over 2 metres to its side wall. As illustrated by drawing no. 10 that gap would be greater than the current distance between the two storey side faces of Nos 26 and 28.

Moreover, as the front face of No 32 is set slightly forward of No 30 and as it is at a slightly lower level, this would help to mitigate against any potential terracing effect, as would the articulation resulting from the slight set down of the proposed two storey extension’s roof and its first floor set back relative to the host. That set back, and the two storey extension’s subordinate form, together with landscaping and the secluded siting, would significantly limit the extent to which the proposal would be observed in the wider streetscene.

Amongst other things, the Council’s Residential Extensions, [name] and [name] Guidance 2000 (‘SDG’) states that proposals should consider the character of the streetscene. It sets out at [name] E3 that regard should be had to the space around buildings, and that a two storey extension should normally be sited at least 1.5 metres from a side boundary.

Whilst this two storey extension would be just 1 metre from the side boundary, for the above reasons and having regard to the individual circumstances here, as required by the SDG, it would not result in the closure of a visually important gap, and it would comply with the broad thrust of its advice.

As the scheme would not harm the character and appearance of the area, it would not conflict with Policies 28S, 29 and 30 of the Bedford Borough Local Plan 2030 (adopted 2020). These require, amongst other things, that development shall contribute to good place-making and good design by promoting local distinctiveness and complementing the character of the area. The appeal will therefore be allowed.

Turning to the matter of conditions, and having regard to the tests in the National Planning Policy Framework, the standard time limit is necessary, as is, in the interests of certainty, a condition requiring that the development be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. Finally, to protect the character and appearance of the host property and the area, I have imposed a condition requiring that the scheme be faced in matching materials.

For the above reasons, and having regard to all other matters raised, the appeal is allowed.