Appeal 3309904

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for single story rear extension, double story porch extension and first floor side extension with façade alterations at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 145489, dated 2 September 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 accordance with the following approved plans: site and location plan; proposed floorplans; proposed elevations and proposed roof plan.

I have amended the description of development in the decision to remove words which are not part of the act of development.

The main issue is the effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area.

[address] is a generally straight road which rises from the A46, and crests before descending towards [address]. Although a relatively long main route into Nettleham, [address] has a clearly residential character. The appearance of the dwellings along its length vary in size, orientation and materials.

The host property is a substantial detached property located in a spacious plot and set back from the public highway. The surrounding properties generally occupy similar positions in equivalent sized plots. Due to this, and the position of the dwelling part-way along the crest of the hill, it does not form a particularly prominent feature on [address] and its visual envelope is limited.

The dwellings in the vicinity of the site are varied in scale, as some are single storey and others appear to have been extended, but all appear as substantial properties. The form, articulation and design detailing of each property is different, although some do share commonalities such as gables and mock-tudor detailing. There is a predominance of red brick dwellings in the immediate vicinity of the site, however along the length of [address] and onto the surrounding streets, there is considerable variation in materials, with stone, brick, painted brick, render and cladding all being evident to varying degrees.

The proposed extensions visible from the front would inevitably increase its mass. However the ridge height of the first floor side extension would be lower than that of the main dwelling and it would be in line with the existing first floor front elevation, which is slightly set back in relation to the ground floor. The double storey porch would add to the mass of the building because of its height and the gable feature, although it too would be lower than the existing ridge height and not project forward of the existing front elevation. Due to the extensions sitting within the confines of the overall dimensions of the dwelling, the additional scale would be limited, and the proportions would not appear incongruous in relation to the substantial host property.

The Council’s officer report highlights concerns with modern alterations and identifies that the host property would become an alien feature. While there is no explicit reference to materials in either the Council’s report or reason for refusal, the plans clearly show that the external appearance of the dwelling would be significantly changed by the introduction of white render and black cladding in place of the existing red brick. However there is a range of materials in use along [address] and the surrounding streets, including a small number of modern alterations.

The double storey porch extension, with its strong vertical emphasis as a result of its narrow width, height and fenestration would introduce a distinct new element to the form of the building. However, it would be integrated into the dwelling as proposed through the use of materials.

Overall, the dwelling would have a different appearance to those in the immediate surrounds. However, the appeal site does not occupy a prominent position, and views are very localised due to the linear nature and topography of [address].

As a result, the appeal proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area. It would comply with Central Lincolnshire Local Plan adopted April 2017 Policies LP17 and LP26, and Nettleham Neighbourhood Plan Policy D – 6 which require development to recognise and take into consideration the character and local distinctiveness of the area.

The Council has suggested several conditions should the appeal be allowed. I have had regard to these in light of the advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance. I have imposed standard conditions relating to the commencement of development and approved plans to define the terms of the permission.

While the Council has suggested a condition be imposed requiring materials to match those of the existing building, the submitted plans clearly show the use of different materials. For the reasons given above, the proposed materials are acceptable. As these are shown on the proposed elevations drawing, there is no need for a further condition to be imposed.

For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.