Appeal 3327817

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey side extension at [site address] , Audenshaw, Tameside in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/00343/FUL, dated 18 April 2023, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: TQRQM23108113223618, TQRQM23108122603023, E002, P001, P002, P003 and the un-numbered side and rear elevation plans.

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

The proposal would result in a modest, single storey, side extension between the existing side boundary fence and the dwelling. The dwelling has previously been extended and the two storey gable of that extension faces the side boundary with [address]. The property occupies a corner plot with its main elevation facing [address]. The side and rear garden are screened from view by the high boundary which is made up of a low brick wall with timber fence panels between high brick piers. The eaves of the proposed lean-to extension would be less than a metre above the hight of the boundary.

Although the proposed extension would be visible above the boundary wall, it would be of a relatively modest height. In some respects, it would break up the www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate Appeal Decision: APP/G4240/D/23/3327817 appearance of the two storey side facing gable. It would be more imposing than the boundary fence and wall but I am not satisfied that it would be overbearing when using the pavement. The two storey extension is already closer to the road than the houses behind. This further addition would not materially alter the relationship between this property and its rear neighbours. Overall, the proposal would not be overly prominent or result in harm to the street scene. The design proposed would not be out of keeping with the appearance of the dwelling.

As the proposal would meet the needs of the occupiers without harm to the character of the area, I consider that on balance, it satisfies the detailed design requirements of policy H10(a) of the Tameside Unitary Development Plan (2004); and the more general requirements of policy C1. I also find no conflict with the design requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The proposal would not be at odds with the Tameside Residential Design Supplementary Planning Document (2010) as it would be of appropriate materials and subordinate in scale in accordance with policy RED1; and it would respect the architectural style and scale of the existing building and those surrounding it in accordance with policy RED5. It would not be set back one metre from the boundary but this would not result in terracing and alternative rear access could be achieved if required. Given the existing approved depth of the two storey extension, it would not break a well defined building line.

In conclusion, the proposal would not result in harm to the appearance of the dwelling or the street scene. As there are no other matters that weigh significantly against the proposal, I allow the appeal.

I have imposed conditions relating to the commencement of development and the details of the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. As the plans specify matching materials no further conditions are necessary.