Appeal 3322030

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the Erection of side porch. Erection of single storey front extension to form kitchen and changes to fenestration at [site address] , [site address] , [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2022/1577, dated 29 November 2022, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

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 development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans: 00, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 0011

I have taken the description of development from the planning application form but, for clarity, removed the reference to a reduction in the size of the extension.

I note that there is a draft Tandridge Local Plan that has been submitted to the Planning Inspectorate for independent examination. As the plan has not yet been adopted, its policies carry limited weight.

The main issue is the effect of the appeal proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

[address] is a development of two storey dwellings which for the most part comprise terraces within a landscaped, relatively open setting. There is a uniformity derived from the buildings’ height and gable end roof forms, along with the use of brick and roof tiles, which also feature on the roofs of the front porches.

The appeal site is located at one end of an L shaped cluster of buildings set around a pedestrian path and front gardens. The front elevation of the appeal site is set slightly forward of the adjacent building. The form and layout in this particular section of the street is such that there is not a uniform front building line. The single storey extension would accentuate the staggered building line to the front, particularly given it would not span the full width of the front elevation. This, in my view, would enable the proposed extension to sit appropriately within the street scene and not be unduly dominant.

When viewed from the side, I acknowledge that the extension would be highly visible given its corner location, and the resultant building would also occupy more of its plot than similar houses nearby. The extension would, however, be read as a subservient addition due to its form and mono-pitch tiled roof following the pattern of porches and other front extensions in [address].

The proposed porch to the side elevation mirrors that of [address] adjacent and would contribute to the interest of this elevation of the two adjoining houses. I do not consider that the front extension would make this elevation appear unbalanced in street views, given that there are very limited street views of this side elevation in its entirety.

[name] note that front extensions are not a common feature of this street, given its form, scale and materials, I consider that the extension would sit comfortably with the host building and in the street scene as a whole. As such, the appeal proposal is in line with the aims of policy CP18 of Tandridge District Core Strategy 2008 and policy DP7 of Tandridge Local Plan Part 2: detailed policies 2014-2029, both of which, amongst other things, require new development to respect character, setting and local distinctiveness. I conclude therefore that the appeal proposal would not result in any harm to the character and appearance of the area.

Given that the extension would be significantly set back from the boundary with number [address] adjacent, I have no reason to conclude that there would be an undue impact on the living conditions of the occupiers.

For the reasons set out above, the appeal is allowed.