Appeal 3309615

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a two-storey extension to the front of the existing residential property and proposed driveway extension with widened dropped kerb at [site address] , Farncombe, Godalming, Surrey [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref.WA/2022/01668, dated 17 June 2022, 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 strict accordance with the following approved plans: 0003_001 [name] location and Block Plan; 0003_002 Existing Site Plan and [name]; 0003_003 [name]; 0003_004 [name] and Block Plan; 0003_005 [name] and [name] & 0003_006 [name].

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 ground floor and first floor windows in the north east (side) and the south western (side) elevations shall be glazed with obscured glazing and no part of those windows that is less than 1.7m above the floor level of the room in which they are installed shall be capable of being opened. Thereafter the windows shall be retained in that condition.

The main issue in the appeal is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupants of [address] in relation to loss of outlook and loss of light.

The appeal site is a two storey detached house on the north-west side of [address] in a residential area. The site is generally flat. [address] is location to the south and this is orientated towards a road junction away from the appeal site, which directly faces this arm of [address]. No.[address] is a detached dwelling located adjacent to the appeal site on its north-eastern side.

Planning permission is sought for the erection of a two-storey front extension, widening of an existing dropped kerb and alterations to the parking arrangements.

No.[address] is a chalet bungalow with its gable end facing the road. In the roof slope facing the appeal site there are three rooflights and some solar panels. The rooflights are located broadly speaking in the central part of the roof slope. The north western rooflight serves a bedroom and is opposite the two storey dwelling on the appeal site. The central rooflight serves a stairwell and the south-eastern rooflight serves a bedroom.

There is an existing gap (about 1.8m) between the north-eastern flank elevation of no.11 and the flank wall of no.13. This would partially reduce at ground floor level if the proposal was implemented, but the gap at first floor level would remain. Each relevant roofslope slopes away from each other and this would continue to be the case if the proposal was implemented. Furthermore, the roof of the proposed front extension closest to no.13 would be hipped and its ridge line would be lower than the ridge line on the original dwelling.

In addition to that the two bedrooms at no.13 which have the rooflights each have an additional window. In each case this is the primary window and is in each gable end (north-west rear and south-east front elevations). These are good-sized windows measuring about 1.7m wide by about 1m high.

A combination of all these factors leads me to conclude that the outlook from each of the two bedrooms would not be unduly oppressive when considered in the round. The middle rooflight does not function to provide a view and I note the Council do not allege that there would be a loss of outlook from that rooflight sufficient to warrant the refusal of planning permission. I agree with that conclusion.

Given the orientations, roof heights and profiles and separation distances that would be in play after the proposed development was in place, I do not consider that there would be a loss of light to the stairway or the two bedrooms sufficient to warrant refusal of planning permission. 10.There is an array of solar panels on the southern roof slope of no.[address]. Potential loss of daylight/sunlight reaching solar panels is a material consideration in the decision-making process. The use of solar panels contributes to the reduction in reliance on non-renewable energy and consequently carbon emissions, even though individually it is a very modest contribution. 11.A Shadow Study by [name] has been created using a 3D model of the existing dwelling, its neighbours, and the proposed extension. The model was created following on from a measured building survey, using GPS co-ordinates and the suns path at specific times of the year to illustrate the cast of the shadows. The sun is highest in the sky at the summer solstice and lowest at the winter solstice. It maps the sun’s path at consistent intervals on both these days including when shadows are at their minimum and maximum. It includes analysing shadows which are cast by no.[address] which stands significantly further forward of the existing front building line of no.11. It demonstrates that the proposed development would have a negligible adverse impact on light reaching the solar panels at no.[address]. I consider this is a study to which considerable weight can be attached and as a result I consider that light reaching the solar panels would not be unduly affected by the proposed development. I am supported by the Council in my conclusion as I note that the Council did not assert that the proposed development would materially reduce light reaching the solar panels. 12.Therefore, on the main issue, I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of the occupants of no.[address] by reason of loss of light or outlook and would not unduly compromise the optimisation of their solar panels. The proposal would not be in breach of policy TD1 of the Waverley Local Plan (Part 1) 2018 or retained policies D1 or D4 of the Waverley Local Plan 2002.