Appeal 3303171

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a first floor side extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/348992/22, dated 29 April 2022, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: CO 04225768/3, CO 04225768/4, CO 04225768/5 and CO 04225768/6.

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 development proposed on the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.

The appeal property is a two storey semi-detached dwelling located on the corner of [address] and [address] in a residential area. There are areas of hardstanding to the front and side of the property with a garden, driveway and detached garage to the rear. A single storey extension to the side of the property projects towards [address]. Although there is a mixture of styles of mainly detached, semi-detached and terraced properties in the surrounding area, pitched or hipped roofs are a characteristic feature. Properties are generally set back from the road with low level boundary treatments and planting.

The proposal is for a first floor extension above the footprint of the existing side extension which projects a short distance beyond the original rear wall of the dwelling. The proposed extension would feature a hipped roof which would also extend above the existing two storey flat roof extension at the rear. A similar scheme for a two storey side extension to the property was granted permission by the Council in 20051, albeit the permission for that scheme has since lapsed and was of a slightly smaller scale than the appeal proposal. The previous decision was made prior to the adoption of the Oldham Council Joint Core Strategy and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document 2011 (the DPD) and before the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework).

The proposed extension would be a substantial addition to the property and would be clearly visible from both [address] and [address]. However, taking into account the slight set back from the original front elevation, and its hipped roof design which would slope away from the front of the property, the proposal would appear as a subservient addition to the original building. The proposal would be positioned a reasonable distance away from the boundary with [address] and would not be an overly dominant feature in the street scene. Furthermore, there are examples of other two storey side extensions within the wider area of not dissimilar scale and massing to the proposal, including those situated at 1 and [address]. The new pitched roof above the existing two storey flat roofed extension would be an improvement to the appearance of the property.

For the above reasons, I find that the proposal would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the host property or the surrounding area. Accordingly, it would comply with Policies 9 and 20 of the DPD which, amongst other things, seek to secure high quality design and development that does not have a significant adverse impact on the visual amenity of the area. The proposal would also comply with paragraph 130 of the Framework, which, amongst other things, requires development to be sympathetic to local character.

In addition to the standard implementation condition, I have imposed a condition specifying the relevant plans as this provides certainty. In the interests of the character and appearance of the area, it is necessary to include a condition to ensure that the external materials of the extension match the existing building.

For the above reasons and subject to the conditions set out above, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.