Appeal 3360782

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing garage and erection of two storey side and rear extension at [site address] , Buckinghamshire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/06196/FUL, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: 100; 101 and 120A.

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

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 development on the living conditions of the occupants of [address], with particular regard to outlook, loss of light and overshadowing.

The appeal property is a detached two-storey dwelling which currently has an attached single garage, with side access to the large rear garden. The proposed development would replace the garage with a two-storey side and rear extension.

The adjoining property to the side, [address], has been extended at the rear and has a first-floor side facing window which is obscurely glazed, with the permitted plans showing this room to be a study. The appeal site is located to the northern side of this property and the natural path of the sun means that the neighbouring property’s side window does not receive direct sunlight and therefore would not be affected by overshadowing.

Whilst the proximity of the proposed extension would have some impact in terms of the availability of daylight to this room, I am conscious that given the obscure glazed window the use of this room as a habitable room (as opposed to a study) does not provide a suitable living environment for a bedroom. With that in mind, I consider that any loss of daylight would only have a very minimal impact. Similarly, outlook from the window is already constrained by the obscure glazing to the extent that there would be a limited experience of the increased building mass when viewed from this window.

Overall, I conclude that the proposal would not cause an unacceptable level of harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] by reasons of outlook, loss of light or overshadowing. As such the proposal would accord with Policy DM35 of the Wycombe District Local Plan (2019) which amongst other matters seek to protect the living conditions of occupiers of neighbouring properties from significant adverse impacts on amenity.

Other than the standard time limit condition, it is necessary to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans for the reason of certainty. In the interests of the character and appearance of the area, a condition relating to matching materials is also necessary.

The Council has suggested that the first-floor side windows to the two en-suites’ should be fixed shut and obscurely glazed and be a minimum of 1.7 metres above floor level. However, I consider that none of these necessary given that there is little prospect of any loss of privacy to the occupiers of No.94 as a result of these windows.

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 report, and on that basis the appeal is allowed.