Appeal 3296600

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for two storey and single storey side extension at [site address] , [name], [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/00463/HOU, dated 3 February 2022, 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: Ref 22-5008 Sheet 1 Location Plan; Ref 22-5008 Sheet 3 [name]; Ref 22-5008 Sheet 4 [name]; Ref 22-5008 Sheet 5 [name].

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.

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

No 6 is a detached 2 storey property occupying a corner plot. It forms part of a short row of similar properties between [address] and [address]. The wider residential area is characterized by a variety of sizes and styles of dwellings set back on from the road. The road layout, changes in topography through the area, and the different styles and siting of properties result in a somewhat mixed character and appearance.

The proposal would be a 2 storey side extension with a single storey flat roof extension to the rear and that would adjoin the existing rear conservatory. The 2 storey part would have a pitched roof nearly the same height, and eaves to match, its host. The extension would be finished in matching brick with a pitched tile roof and matching fenestration. The Council has no concerns in relation to the visual effect of the proposal on the appeal property, and I see no reason to disagree.

The extension would not be forward of the front building line of the row of properties of which No 6 forms part. However, it would finish close to the side boundary and it would more closely approach [address] than the properties to the rear. In this regard, due to the curve of the road, the [address] properties are on slightly stepped building lines but nevertheless they are relatively evenly set back from the street.

No 6 is next to the junction and it is widely separated from No 18 to the rear. It is not read as part of the row of properties that rise away from it along [address]. The closer approach of the extension to the side boundary would not disrupt the uniform building line nor the coherence of the neighbouring group. By virtue of its separate siting and lower ground level, it would not harm the street scene. The prominent corner location would result in the proposal being readily visible. Even so, taking into account the varied siting and mix of properties in the wider area, and the changing topography, the proposal would not be discordant or visually obtrusive in the townscape.

Therefore, I conclude the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area. It would not conflict with the aims of Policies DS1 and DS3 of the City of Bradford Core Strategy Development Plan [name] 2017. These require, among other things, that proposals are appropriate to the area and its context and that they respond to existing positive patterns of development which contribute to the character of the area.

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted subject to conditions.