Appeal 3336316

The appeal is dismissed.

Since the determination of the appeal application the Welwyn and Hatfield Local Plan (LP) has been adopted. In the reason for refusal the Council cited the relevant emerging Local Plan policies and these have been used in the determination of this appeal.

The amendments of the National Planning Policy Framework were published in December 2023 after the determination of the appeal application. These amendments do not alter the basis upon which this appeal has been assessed.

It is considered that the main issue is whether the proposed side extension would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the [site address] Conservation Area.

The appeal property is a 2-storey semi-detached dwelling situated within a primarily residential area which forms part of the extensive [site address] Conservation Area. There is a statutory duty in making planning decisions to pay special attention to preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a Conservation Area. This duty is echoed in LP Policy SADM15

In this case, the character and appearance of the Conservation Area is derived from the siting of the detached and semi-detached dwellings which are generally linked by single storey garages, or walls, above which there are sky gaps. These gaps provide views towards the rear of the dwellings. The design of the dwellings and the choice of external materials also make a positive contribution to the Conservation Area’s character and appearance.

The proposed development comprises alterations to the side and rear of the property which includes the erection of a first floor extension above what is currently the property’s garage/utility room. Although set back from the front elevation of the property, possessing similar eaves height but lower ridge height than the main roof and being subordinate in scale to the host property, the proposed side extension would be visible within the streetscene along Valley Road.

From the road, because of its siting and width the proposed first floor side extension would materially erode the width of the sky gap between the property and [address]. The side extension would also unbalance the appearance of this pair of semi-detached dwellings. Overall, this element of the appeal scheme would have an adverse effect on the positive contribution that the sky gap makes to the character and appearance of the streetscene of Valley Road in this locality and within this part of the Conservation Area.

The proposed development would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of this designated heritage asset and this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. In this case, although the residential accommodation would be enlarged, no specific public benefits have been identified by the appellant which would outweigh the harm caused to the

Examples of other side extensions have been provided by the appellant but these are of varying dates, including predating the extant Local Plan, and their full planning circumstances have not been provided. Further, only a limited number of these schemes have been erected along Valley Road and these examples demonstrate that the sky gaps between the dwellings have been adversely affected. For these reasons only limited weight is given to these other schemes in the determination of this appeal.

For the reasons given, it is concluded that the proposed side extension would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the [site address] Conservation Area and, as such would conflict with LP Policy SADM15 and LP Policy SP9 concerning developments relating to their surroundings and local distinctiveness. Accordingly, it is concluded that this appeal should be dismissed,