Appeal 3296221

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for 2 storey side extension and single storey rear extension and front extension forming a porch at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2021/40608 dated 1 December 2021, and the plans submitted with it, subject to conditions set out below. (1) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. (2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan and [name]: GDS 4058 [name] and GDS 4059 [name]. (3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the hereby approved development shall match those used in the existing building.

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

The site is within a predominantly residential area and comprises an end terraced property. Whilst there are some properties in the area which have been altered there is an architectural rhythm to the streetscene.

[address] Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (2021) (the SPD) suggests that amongst other things two storey side extensions should not be greater than 50% of the width of the original house, have some degree of set back from the main front elevation and retain a 1m gap between the building and the side boundary unless the prevailing character is different.

The appeal proposal does not comply with the guidelines outlined in the SPD. The proposal follows the front building line of the existing house without a set back. Notwithstanding this I observed during my site visit that other properties in the area have similar extensions.

The gap between the proposed development and the side boundary would be removed, nevertheless a shared pedestrian access would be retained between the appeal site and adjacent property No. [address]. The retention of a shared access would preserve a gap between the end terraced properties.

The Council did not raise concern with regard to the single storey rear extension and front extension forming a porch, based on the information before me I do not disagree.

I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the area. There is no conflict with Policy QE7 of the Warrington Borough Council, Local Plan Core Strategy (2014) which amongst other things seeks to ensure developments have regard harmonise with the scale and proportions of adjacent and/or existing buildings and are of good design.

For the above reasons I conclude that this appeal should be allowed.

I have imposed a standard condition relating to the commencement of development and a condition specifying the relevant plans as this provides certainty. In order to safeguard the character and appearance of the area I have imposed a condition concerning materials.