Appeal 3351175

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal property comprises a two-storey semi-detached dwelling set back from the road behind a front garden and parking area and with a longer garden to the rear. The dwelling appears proportionally similar to its attached neighbour.

It is located within a small ribbon of development in the open countryside. Neighbouring dwellings within this ribbon of development include one and two-storey detached dwellings and two-storey semi-detached dwellings.

The ribbon of development is surrounded by countryside. There are large agricultural fields beyond a hedgerow on the opposite side of [site address] to the appeal site; and large fields beyond rear gardens to the rear of the appeal site. This makes for a green and spacious character.

Properties within the ribbon of development are set back behind a grass verge and pavement and there are gaps between dwellings and pairs of dwellings, either from ground level upwards, or above low single storey buildings. These gaps provide for glimpses between and beyond dwellings and contribute to the area’s spacious qualities.

During my site visit, I observed that dwellings within the ribbon of development have been altered and/or extended and that such changes generally appear in keeping with host dwellings and with the character of the surrounding area.

Within the open countryside, Policy RUR 11 of the Council’s Site Allocations and Development Policies Document (2022) generally considers extensions that increase the size of original buildings by more than 50% to be disproportionate.

Contrary to Policy RUR 11, the proposed development would represent an increase in excess of 50% and notably, it would result in significant alterations to the dwelling’s external appearance.

The proposal would involve the creation of a two storey element with a hipped roof in addition to that of the original dwelling. This would combine with the overall scale of the proposal, relative to the host dwelling, whereby, despite being set back from the front elevation, the proposal would draw attention to itself as a tall, bulky and somewhat incongruous feature, where no other similar extension exists.

The harm arising from this would be exacerbated by the proposal serving to fill much of the existing gap at first floor level between the appeal property and its neighbour to the west. This would result in a development that would appear out of character with its surroundings and which would be detrimental to the area’s notably spacious qualities.

Taking all of the above into account, I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Policy PG6 of the [site address] Local Plan Strategy (2017); and to Policy RUR 11 of the [site address] Site Allocations and Development Policies Document, which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character

For the reasons given above, the appeal does not succeed.