Appeal 3352706

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for front porch extension at [site address] , Sandwell, Tipton [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application reference DC/24/69479 and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the following approved plans: 2024-01/ REV 01, 2024-03/ REV 01.

The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site lies within a quiet residential area made up of predominantly two-storey detached and semi-detached brick dwellings, and some terraces, with protruding front elements and ground floor sloping roofs. There is an overall symmetry between semi-detached pairs, with some maintaining similar elevations, whilst others have variance in design, colour and materials. Frontages are primarily open, with some low boundary treatments and a mix of green lawns and hard landscaping. The area has small pockets of greenery and trees, which along with the frontages contribute to a pleasant suburban character.

The appeal property lies within a row of semi-detached and detached dwellings and does not therefore occupy a particularly prominent position within the street scene. It has an existing front porch which connects to the neighbouring semi-detached dwelling’s garage and spans the inner half of the dwellings. Whilst the appeal property’s door entrance and window are located on the protruding wall, the neighbour’s door and window are set back, adjacent to the garage door. The current arrangement unbalances the symmetry of the semi-detached pair, unlike other symmetrical pairs in the area which have matching front elevations, windows and doors.

The proposal would extend the porch across the remaining half of the front elevation to span the whole width. The scale and proportions of the proposed extension would remain modest in relation to the host property and in keeping with the surrounding area. The proposed extension would create a design which, although not present within the host semi-detached pair, is common within the area. Due to the existing semi-detached pair’s unbalanced front elevation, the proposed design would not harm the symmetry. In addition, the proposal would use materials and colours that would harmonise with the host property and surrounding area. Overall, the proposed design would be acceptable.

The proposed porch would not harm the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would therefore accord with the design principles of Policy ENV3 of the Black Country Core Strategy [[name] 2011]. The proposal would also accord with Policy SAD EOS 9 of the Site Allocations and Delivery Development Plan Document [[name] 2012], which seeks to maintain design that is compatible with its surrounding area. Lastly, the proposal would accord with the [name] Planning Document [January 2014], which promotes domestic extensions that are in keeping with their surroundings by scale, design and materials.

As well as the standard condition relating to the commencement of development, a condition specifying the relevant plans is considered necessary, as this provides certainty. A condition requiring external materials to match the existing is needed to protect the character and appearance of the area.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s recommendation and on that basis the appeal is allowed.