Appeal 3313371

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for demolition of conservatory and erection of two storey rear extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, 77609/APP/2022/3088 dated 9 October 2022 subject to the following conditions: -

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: site location plan, 1, 2 rev B, 3 rev A, and 4.

The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match the existing building.

The main issues are the effect of the development on: i) the character and appearance of the area and host property; and ii) the living conditions of the occupiers of No.[address] with particular regard to overbearing impact, overshadowing and outlook.

[name] visited the site, the conservatory had been removed and a rear extension up to a single-storey level was under construction.

The appeal property is located at the end of [address]. Along with its neighbour, No.2B, the two detached properties with linked garages are of the same design with the rest of the street exhibiting a mix of property styles and forms.

The proposed two-storey extension would align with the rear of the garage and reflects the existing form of the property. The proposal would effectively move the rear façade further back creating a lengthy side elevation. It thereby would fully reflect the architectural design and integrate with the existing property. It would also be proportionate to the existing property and would accord with policy DMHD1 criterion 6 of Hillingdon Local Plan: [name] – Development Management Policies for two-storey rear extensions not to extend into an area provided by a 45-degree line of sight drawn from the centre of the nearest ground or first floor habitable room window of an adjacent property.

Due to the driveway space between Nos.2A and 2B the side of the extension would be seen in views between those properties. Although that would only be from directly opposite and in general views along the street the depth would not be discernible. Moreover, I do not find that it would be an incongruous feature and there are other buildings in the immediate vicinity which have a large scale including an apartment block seen through the gap to the side of the appeal property.

In conclusion, I do not find that the development would be visually intrusive or harmful to the existing property. The proposal would thereby accord with the requirements of [name] 1, DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: [name] - Development Management Policies. It would also accord with the design requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. No.[address]

As noted above, the extension would not protrude beyond the 45-degree line, and it would be offset from the shared boundary with No.2. Having regard to the relationship I do not find that the extension would be overly intrusive to have an overbearing impact or significant loss of outlook. The additional depth of the extension would result in some overshadowing, however, given the orientation this would only be for part of the morning, and would not be to the extent to be materially harmful to the occupiers’ enjoyment of their property.

Therefore, the development would accord with policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: [name] - [name] (2012), and [name] 11 and DMHD 1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: [name] - Development Management Policies (2020) with regards to not adversely impacting on the amenities of adjacent properties.

Conditions are necessary in the interests of compliance with statutory requirements relating to the commencement of development and the plans for certainty. I have also imposed a condition to secure the materials in the visual interest.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed, and planning permission granted.