Appeal 3355107

The appeal is dismissed.

The application was amended during the course of its determination period which included removing other extensions from the scheme. I have therefore used the amended description, taken from the Council’s decision notice, in the banner heading above.

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

[address] is an attractive end of terrace dwelling located in a row of properties that lie adjacent to [address], a narrow track that is also a public right of way. The appeal site is set down from the level of the track due to the steeply sloping hillside here. The site is reasonably remote from other dwellings and is within a rural area, being surrounded by open countryside.

Due, in part, to the change in land levels, the appeal property is markedly taller than the rest of the neighbouring terrace, with the eaves of the adjoining property abutting [address] at a point roughly level with its first floor. The neighbouring properties are understood to comprise of converted agricultural buildings and their random arrangement of fenestration and high solid to void ratio would appear to be an indication of this. However, unlike the neighbouring properties in the terrace, the front elevation of [address] is well-balanced, and exhibits a clear symmetry across its two floors. This is in part due to the alignment of the ground and first floor windows, their matching proportions and the central position of the doorway. Its more formal square cut, coursed stonework also differentiates the appeal property from its neighbours which are faced with random coursed stonework. As seen from [address], the distinctive, more dominant and formal appearance of the front elevation of the appeal property is an important component of the terrace and contributes positively to the character and appearance of the area.

The proposed extension to the prominent front elevation of the dwelling would be a highly visible alteration that, through its scale, extensive glazing and proportions would unbalance the careful composition of the principal elevation of [address], eroding its existing symmetry. The extension would occupy the full width of the ground floor and would project out well beyond the neighbouring dwelling, diminishing the ability to appreciate the contrast between the balanced elevation of [address] and the less prominent and more informal neighbouring terrace.

Whilst my attention has been drawn to a two storey extension at the opposite end of the terrace, this is not prominent from [address] due to the presence of an intervening building and the continuous downward slope of the land. There are no ground floor projections to the elevations of the dwellings closest to the appeal site that are visible from [address] and, in that regard, the appeal proposal would appear incongruous here. For these reasons the proposal would diminish the positive contribution that [address] makes to the terrace and to the character and appearance of the area as a whole. This would be highly evident to those using the public right of way of [address].

I acknowledge that the application has been amended due in part to concerns expressed by the Council with regard to the Green Belt. However, the application was refused on the basis of the effect on the character and appearance of the area and my role is to consider the scheme before me.

For the above reasons the proposal would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policy BT1 of the Calderdale Local Plan (2023) which seeks to ensure new development constitutes high quality design that preserves character and appearance.

There would also be conflict with the [name] and Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2024) which guides that new extensions, additions and alterations should not extend beyond the established front building line whilst respecting the scale, form, proportions, and character and appearance of the existing building and that of the locality.

For the reasons given, having considered the development plan as a whole, along with all other relevant material considerations, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.