Appeal 3340792

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a new second storey added to an existing single-storey side and rear extension, proposed new single storey rear extension, modifications to the existing front entry porch at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 23/3085/HOT, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: - 23.002_LP01, 23.002_BP01, 23.002_EE01, 23.002_EE02, 23.002_EE03, 23.002_EE04, 23.002_EP01, 23.002_EP02, 23.002_EP03, 23.002_PE01, 23.002_PE02, 23.002_PE03, 23.002_PE04, 23.002_PP01, 23.002_PP02, 23.002_PP03 & 23.002_SE01.

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 proposed first-floor windows in the flank elevations of the development hereby approved shall at no time be openable or glazed, otherwise than in obscured glass, below a minimum height of 1.7 metres above the relevant floor level

The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.

[address] is a horseshoe of residential properties with cohesion in design and scale. No.[address] to the west. Located at the end, it forms a corner with a semi-detached pair of dwellings (Nos.9&10) with a small gap between them. The appeal property has a single-storey extension to the side which is set back and follows the angle of the boundary. The proposal would add a first floor above that extension, together with a single-storey infill to the rear and alterations to the porch. The Council have raised no objections to the rear extension which aligns with the neighbour’s and the porch element, and I have no reason to disagree. My considerations are therefore focused on the first-floor extension.

The first-floor extension is designed with a number of valleys and pitches to the roof. These, however, respond to the cranked and angled alignment of the extension and, overall, it has a hipped form which corresponds with the existing property. To the rear, the extension is wider than half the width of the host property, yet to the front, it has a limited projection and has a substantial setback. It would also be set down from the main ridge line. Thereby, while a sizeable extension, due to its design and siting the first-floor addition would have a subservience and would not be overly dominant. It would also maintain an offset from the boundary and given the splayed plots the additional storey would not have an overbearing effect on No. 10 to the southeast.

The space between the properties is part of the composition of [address], although the size of the gap is not consistent, and views through some are of built form beyond. My attention has also been drawn to other side extensions which include those in more prominent locations, and No.6, opposite, which occupies a very similar position in the street scene. In plan form, the extension does appear to fully enclose the space to the side, however, other than in limited close proximity views, the extension would be screened by the host property. The separation and spacing to the corner would be visually retained within the street scene, and overall, I find that the character and appearance of the area would not be adversely harmed.

Therefore, the proposal accords with policies LP1 and LP8 of the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames Local Plan (adopted 2018) and the guidance taken as a whole within the Council’s Supplementary Planning Document - [name] and [name] (2015). Together these seek high-quality design which respects the local character and to protect the amenity and living conditions for occupants of neighbouring properties

These objectives are echoed in policies 28 and 46 of the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames Local Plan Publication (Regulation 19) Consultation version Local Plan (2023), but as emerging policy these do not carry full weight.

I therefore conclude that the appeal should be allowed, subject to conditions to ensure compliance with the statutory requirements relating to the commencement of development and the plans in order to provide certainty. I have also imposed a condition requiring the materials of the approved development to match the existing property in the interests of the character and appearance of the area.

The Council has also proposed a condition requiring the side windows to be obscurely glazed and as they would face towards neighbouring properties this is necessary to maintain privacy and compliance with policy LP8. However, no policy justification has been provided for the fifth suggested condition that non-road mobile machinery used during construction be fitted with cleaner diesel engines, but in any case, due to the modest scale of the proposal, any plant and machinery is unlikely to give rise to significant emissions to air.

For the reasons set out the appeal is allowed.