Appeal 3326267

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted to erect part single, part two storey side extension together with a single storey front infill extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/00483/FULH, dated 15 March 2023, and the plans submitted with it, No. DMG/23/010/1 and Site Location Plan, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The external materials used in the development hereby approved shall be those specified on the application form.

The application form described the proposed development as part two storey, part first floor side extension. The officer’s report described the development as part single, part two storey side extension together with a single storey front infill extension, as did the appeal form. I have adopted this description in the heading above as it more clearly identifies the development proposed.

The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposal on the appearance of the appeal dwelling and the streetscene.

The appeal property is a detached two-storey dwelling, as are the neighbouring dwellings on the south side of Nobles Green Close; on the north side are detached bungalows. The appeal dwelling is located in the middle of a row of five houses, originally of similar appearance, dating from approximately the 1970s. They are of simple design with gables to the street elevation and single storey flat roofed projections to the front which join on to garages or other single storey elements at the side. The neighbouring property to the east, No.18, has had a first-floor extension to the west side, so that it largely fills its frontage. The result is that Nos.17 and 18 are closely space, as to a lesser extent are Nos.20 and 21, being separated only by a garage.

The appeal property stands out in the row as have a good deal more space around it. The 2-storey part stands up rather awkwardly, rising from a base of assorted flat topped elements that project forward and to the side, including the garage. There is no cohesion or homogeneity in the various parts. In contrast the proposed 2-storey extension to the west would both provide more visual substance and would rest on a ‘plinth’ formed by the fascia that would run the length of the single-storey part of the front elevation. The single storey base would still have a number of disparate elements, including a wide garage door, but it would demonstrate that thought has gone into the design of the whole. The proposed 2-storey gabled element would be set back from the front elevation of the upper part of the existing house, albeit only marginally, and its ridge would be set a little lower; thus there would be a degree of subservience. Whilst the single-storey front lacks articulation, the use of a small palette of materials does remove what could otherwise be somewhat monolithic.

The result of the proposal would be an improvement in the appearance of the appeal dwelling. I do not find that it would be unduly prominent and out of keeping in its context. Rather, the improvement in the appearance of the property would improve the streetscene. I will therefore allow the appeal.

The statutory condition that provides a time limit on the start of development must be imposed. In addition, the council has suggested conditions in the event that the appeal is upheld. These are that the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces shall match those used in the existing building, and that the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. The first of these is not appropriate because the proposal is to use different materials to the existing. The materials proposed are suitable for the proposed extensions and their context. I will therefore include a condition requiring the materials to be those that are specified on the application form. This condition is necessary to ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development. Compliance with the approved plans is necessary for certainty as to the development approved and for the avoidance of doubt; this can be incorporated into the terms of the permission.