Appeal 3300827

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the host property and the streetscene.

The surrounding area is residential, and the distinctive character of [address] is derived from two-storey symmetrically paired, semi-detached dwellings. Particularly on the appeal property’s side of the street, dwellings feature two single-storey flat-roofed projections each, projecting from the front elevation. These are set back from the road with front gardens and low boundary walls. The simplicity of the design and the consistency between paired dwellings creates the appearance of a neat and unified street scene.

There are a number of dwellings which have been altered and feature either a large single storey front extension in place of the two projections or wrap around single storey extensions such as at [address]. There is also a two-storey extension to the front of [address], like the proposal which is subject of this appeal. These do not appear have been granted planning permission however have been in situ for a while and therefore beyond planning enforcement. Nevertheless, two-storey symmetrically paired, semi-detached dwellings with two single-storey flat-roofed projections remains the dominant feature on this side of the street.

The appeal property is symmetrically paired with number 15, and both still retain the design which is characteristic of this side of the street. The proposed two-storey extension to the front of the house would introduce an incongruous element into the otherwise symmetrical pair of properties. The existence of precedent at no.53 does not justify harmful design, and the proposal would still result in an alien form of development in the context of the design of neighbouring properties as described above. The contribution that the host property and adjoining dwelling make to the appearance of the street scene would be diminished as a result. By virtue of its design and scale, the proposal would appear out-of-keeping with the external appearance of the dwelling and would be visually harmful to the area’s established symmetrical character.

I find that the development would harm the character and appearance of the host property and the street scene. Accordingly, it would conflict with the objectives [name] 2 and HOU 9 the Northumberland Local Plan 2016-2036 (adopted March 2022) and the National Planning Policy Framework which seek amongst other things to ensure that proposals for the extension of existing dwellings respects, complements and does not have an unacceptable adverse impact on the style and character of the existing dwelling and its setting or on the character of the surrounding area.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed. Ifeanyi Chukwujekwu APPEALS PLANNING OFFICER

I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed.