Appeal 3308745

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the impact of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal property is a semi detached two storey modern house which occupies a prominent corner position at the junction of [name] and [address]. Although the property fronts onto [name] its address is associated with the adjoining street.

Due to the topography of the area [name] slopes fairly steeply and the appeal property occupies an area whose change in level makes the existing building very prominent within the streetscene as a result. This prominence is softened somewhat by the existing front and side gardens that are both open plan, although both are largely absent of any planting or foliage. Despite this lack of planting I consider that this open plan nature does however contribute in a positive manner to the overriding suburban character of the area in its role as providing visual relief from the built form of its surroundings.

The property is constructed in a similar way to many within the area using brick and light coloured render materials in its construction. To the rear the steepness of the side garden lessens somewhat although a verge of grass is maintained in front of a high timber screen fence as it runs along the initial length of [address] itself.

The proposal before me intends to extend to the side of this property. This would result in a two storey projection into the side grassed garden and would Appeal Decision Appeal Ref: APP/W4223/D/22/3308745 come to around 2m to the highway at its nearest extent. As a result of the steep landscape here, it would appear necessary for the proposed gable wall to extend further downwards following the slope and this would have the effect of making the proposed gable extension more prominent within the streetscene.

Even though the proposal would include a reasonable set back from the front elevation of the property and a set down to the ridge, the proposal would still appear dominant within the streetscene through a protruding high two storey element that would further enclose this prominent corner.

Although the presence of windows upon this elevation would be welcome, as would the presence of a proposed hedge as suggested on the plans, ultimately there would be little in the way of either architectural features, planting or landscaping to help soften and mitigate the harmful prominence of this building.

As a result of this, the proposal would be unable to effectively mitigate its over dominant impact upon [name] and, to a lesser extent, to [address]. Although there are some other examples nearby I do not consider that any of these are as prominent or wholly comparable to this difficult site and as such I can give them only limited weight.

[name] consider that there would be ways to design and construct an extension here that would be able to lessen its overall impact, ultimately, I consider that the proposal before me would be in conflict with Policies 9 and 20 of the Joint Development Plan Document (DPD) for Oldham as well as the guidance on the importance of good design as included within the National Planning Policy Framework (The Framework). As such this appeal must fail.

For the reasons given above, and taking into account of all other matters raised, I dismiss the appeal.