Appeal 3303177

The appeal is dismissed.

The description of development is taken from the application form. The Council’s decision notice describes the proposed development as “Single storey front infill extension. First floor side extension.”

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

The appeal property is an extended two storey detached dwelling with a single storey, flat-roofed attached garage to the side. The dwelling is located towards the end of a cul-de-sac and is set back from the road behind a small parking area and has a garden to the rear.

The surrounding area is residential and is characterised by the presence of two storey detached dwellings set back from the road behind short front gardens and/or parking areas and with longer gardens to the rear.

Whilst dwellings are located relatively close to one another, the front gardens and/or parking areas combine with the presence of gaps between dwellings, including above single storey elements, to provide for a sense of spaciousness.

During my site visit I noted that, whilst many dwellings in the area have been altered and/or extended, such changes tend to appear in keeping with and subservient to the host property and in keeping with the surrounding area.

The proposed development would include a first floor extension to the side of the appeal property. I find that when combined with the existing first floor extension to the other side of the dwelling, the proposal would result in additions of such scale and volume as to overwhelm and subsume the original appearance of the host dwelling.

Rather than appear subservient, the proposed extension would, due to its height, scale and minimal set back from the front elevation, add considerable bulk to the appeal property. I find that it would result in the creation of an overly-wide dwelling that would unduly dominate its plot and appear out of keeping with neighbouring dwellings that do not appear unduly dominant in their surroundings. 10.The harm arising from the above would be exacerbated by the prominent first floor siting of the proposal such that it would draw attention to itself as a visually obtrusive and incongruous addition. 11.Further to the above, the proposed extension would fill a gap between the appeal property and its neighbour, Number [address]. This would reduce the identified spacious qualities of the area and in so doing, it would emphasise the prominence and undue dominance of the proposed development within the wider street scene. 12.Taking the above into account, the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to London Plan (2021) Policy D3; to Core Strategy1 Policy CS1; to DMP2 Policy DM1 and to the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document: [name] (2010), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.