Appeal 3352258

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a double storey side extension and single storey rear extension to replace existing rear conservatory at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/01275/H, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 1100_KA100 A; 1100_KA101 A; 1100_KA200 A; 1100_KA201 A; 1100_KA210 A; 1100_KA211 A; 1100_KA250 A; 1100_KA300 A; 1100_KA301 A; 1100_KA302 A; 1100_KA303 A; 1100_KA400 A; 1100_KA401 A; 1100_KA402 A & 1100_KA403 A

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing dwelling.

This is the effect of the proposals on the character and appearance of the host property and its surroundings.

The appeal property, a detached dwelling, is situated at the junction of [address] and [address] in a pleasant, predominantly residential area displaying a variety of house designs. To the west of the property and opposite, along [address]’s frontages, the predominant built forms are semi-detached dwellings, whilst immediately to the rear, along [address] western frontage, are detached dwellings. Playing fields are evident on the other side of [address] from the appeal site, behind a hedged frontage.

The appeal property occupies a corner plot in a prominent position, particularly in views along [address]. The extensions proposed in their totality are sizeable and would be widely seen. The side extension would take up most of the garden space between the property’s eastern elevation and the highway and would breach the building line established by the detached properties to the south along the [address] frontage. Having regard to the advice and guidance provided in its Supplementary Planning Document1, these are factors which led the Council to conclude that the extensions proposed are too large and prominent, materially harming the openness currently in evidence at the junction.

I share the Council’s view that this junction is notable for its openness. However, the main factors contributing to that perception lie outside the site. Firstly, are the open playing fields, which would remain the dominant feature contributing to openness; secondly, the relatively wide junction, made up not only of the highway carriageway and footways, but also a green verge and luxuriant hedge, which would be unaffected.

Whilst the proposed extensions are sizeable, I find them to be well designed, and they would integrate appropriately and tastefully with the form, appearance, and proportions of the host property. Accordingly, whilst the extensions would be widely seen, and would impinge on a side garden, what would be seen would sit acceptably in its visual and spatial contexts. Whilst the level of openness currently in evidence at the junction would be affected, the degree of change experienced would not be such as to prove harmful.

In conclusion, I find the development to an acceptable proposal compliant with those aspects of [name] BCS21 ([name], Local Plan Policies DM26 (Local Character and Distinctiveness), DM27 and DM30 directed to achieving good quality urban design contributing positively to local character and distinctiveness, particularly in residential extensions.

In the interests of visual amenity, I shall impose a condition in respect of external materials. It is also necessary, in the interests of certainty, that the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

All other matters raised have been taken into account, but no other matter is of such significance as to outweigh those considerations that led to my conclusions.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.