Appeal 3338126

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a full width single-storey rear extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref. 23/3157/HOT, dated 24 November 2023 and subject to the following conditions:

The development to which this permission relates shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this Decision;

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: [name]. MD/82/01 Rev. 01; MD/82/02 Rev. 01; MD/82/03 Rev. 01;

The finish of the exterior walls of the extension in rendered blockwork and the roof tiles shall match those of the host dwelling.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed extension on the living conditions for the neighbouring occupiers at No. 80 in terms of outlook.

The appeal dwelling is a mid-terrace dwelling with a plot width similar to that of the other houses in the same row. The appeal proposal is for a dual pitched full width extension extending 5m from the existing rear wall with the existing conservatory to be demolished.

The Council’s objection is not concerned with the size or design of the addition, which cannot be seen from the public realm, but solely relates to the effect on the living conditions for the occupiers of the adjacent No. 80 on the northern flank. In this context the officer’s report refers to the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document on [name] and [name] (‘the [name]) and notes that where extensions to terrace houses exceed 3m in depth the eaves should not exceed 2.2m at any shared boundary to mitigate any detrimental effect on neighbours such as a sense of enclosure or overbearing.

In the case of the appeal proposal this would in fact be the eaves height but permission has been refused as at 5m the depth of an additional 2m to the maximum of [address] house is ‘normally only acceptable if they are infills to Victorian houses’.

[name] would consider this to be a reasonable basis for a refusal in this case (neither the design nor the scale of the proposed extension is particularly sympathetic to the host dwelling and as a terrace property the rear windows are close to the windows and gardens of the houses to each side) there are three material considerations that weigh in the appellant’s favour.

Firstly, the boundary fence with No. 80 is combined with a thick hedge that prevents any inter-visibility between the ground floor rear windows and the back gardens of Nos. 82 and 80. The height of the eaves would be very similar and with the roof pitch sloping away to a maximum height of 3.5m in the midpoint of the site I consider it unlikely that there would be any increase in a perception of increased enclosure or overbearing than already exists.

Secondly, the officer’s report acknowledges that ‘The extension is identical to the rear extension at [address]’ (the next door but one property to the south) which was recently granted permission and has since been constructed. In the absence of any reasons given by the Council why the current appeal proposal was treated differently, I must clearly give this significant weight in coming to my decision.

Finally, the Executor and [name] of No. [address] (the property that the refusal of permission seeks to safeguard) has written to confirm that he has no concerns with the proposed development and is happy for it to go ahead. In itself this would not be sufficient to support a decision that would otherwise be unacceptable, but nonetheless it adds weight to the other considerations that I have identified as supporting the appeal.

For the reasons explained I consider that, on balance, the circumstances of the appeal application outweigh any conflict with Policy LP8 of the Richmond Local Plan 2018 and warrant a grant of permission. I shall therefore allow the appeal.

A condition requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans is needed for the avoidance of doubt and is in the interests of proper planning. A condition in respect of matching external materials will help the extension harmonise with the host dwelling and maintain visual amenity.