Appeal 3308576

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a double storey side extension with garage and single storey rear extension with vaulted roof at [address], Wolverhampton, [site address] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/00712/FUL, dated 19 June 2022, and the plans submitted with it, 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 approved drawings: Location Plan, Block/Site Plan and [name] submitted to the Council on 19 June 2022.

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 proposed extension on the character and appearance of the street scene.

The appeal site is a two storey end of terrace house sited on the corner of [address] and [address]. It forms part of a small cul-de-sac of similar properties. Both the appeal site and No 21 opposite mark the entrance to [address] and are set back from [address] by side gardens. Within the wider streetscape of [address], buildings of varied character predominantly face the street, with small setbacks from the road incorporating mainly front gardens and yards. Although there is some overall uniformity to the front building line of the houses there is a subtle variety to their siting.

The appeal site and No.21 have a typically larger set back from [address] than the immediately surrounding buildings, although this setting back is visually diminished by the mature trees in the side garden of No.21 and trees to the south of the appeal site which together draw the eye and provide an attractive area of greenery within the street. I note that this latter group of trees is covered by a Tree Preservation Order. It is the trees which make the main contribution to the character of the immediate area rather than the gap created by the set back of the buildings at the entrance to the cul-de-sac.

Although the proposed two storey extension would extend towards the side boundary with [address], the plans indicate that there would still be a gap between the proposed side wall and the ownership boundary which the appellant describes as approximately 2.3m, a fact not disputed by the Council. This would be a similar set back to other buildings in the street, including those identified by the appellant. This proposed siting would not be unexpected or out of character in this context, even on a corner plot. Furthermore, there is no indication that the nearby trees would be affected by the proposed development. The verdant character of the immediate area would remain, and the trees would also help filter views of the extension. Whilst there would be some loss of openness within the street scene, as with all extensions, it would not make the building unduly prominent or obtrusive.

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the street scene. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policies D4, D6, D7, D8 and D9 of the Wolverhampton Unitary Development Plan 2006, and Policy ENV3 of the Black Country Core Strategy 2011, which seek to ensure satisfactory design which does not harm the street scene, or those principles of the National Planning Policy Framework that seek good design which is sympathetic to the local area.

For the reasons set out above, the appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted subject to conditions that are necessary in the interests of certainty and safeguarding the character and appearance of the area.