Appeal 3298136

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the effect of the development on the character of the dwelling and the surrounding area.

The appeal site comprises a semi-detached property on [address] with a driveway and off-street parking to the front. The surrounds are residential in nature with no prevailing architectural style; the neighbourhood is characterised by dwellings of various size, design and detailing. There are also differences in the widths of gaps between built form.

The proposal is to remove the existing detached garage and construct a single storey addition to the house that would incorporate a flat roof across much of its extent. Amongst other things, the scheme would project approximately 7 metres to the side of the residence and run some 14 metres along the flank boundary with [address]. It is this section that would be visible from the public domain across the driveway and over the fence on the front boundary.

The extension would nearly double the width of the property; this scale would compete with the proportions of the main dwelling, resulting in an imbalance in built form to the detriment of the character and appearance of the residence. The adverse effect would be exacerbated by the sheer scale of the proposed flat roof, which would be visible from the highway. It would result in a boxy and utilitarian design that would fail to integrate with the features of the host property and detract from the visual quality of the surrounds. _________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________

I am aware that the existing garage is of no architectural merit, still it is detached from the main house by a central walkway, which gives its own sense of place and provides some relief between built form within the site. As such I accrue its removal only limited weight in the planning balance. I also recognise that the scheme would allow for improvements to the internal accommodation for the use of the appellant and his family, the proposed materials would match those of the house, the size of the plot is relatively large when compared to others in the vicinity, and there have been no objections from local residents. However, these matters do not outweigh the harm I have identified above.

I conclude that the scheme would result in harm to the character and appearance of the dwelling and surrounding area. It would contravene Policies CP4, DM14 and DM16 of [name] 2031: The Swale Borough Local Plan July 2017 and the provisions of the Swale Borough Council Supplementary Planning Guidance 'Designing an Extension – A Guide for Householders', which cumulatively seek to secure new development of acceptable scale and appearance.

Based on the preceding and all matters advanced, the appeal is dismissed.