Appeal 3362411

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey side extension at [site address] , Manchester, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 141650/FH/2024, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.

The main issues in this case are the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; and its effect on highway safety.

The appeal property comprises a two-storey semi-detached brick-built dwelling located at the junction of [address] and [address]. It is set back from the road behind a low rail and small garden area. There is a low, railed brick wall to the side, which encloses a small driveway and garden and provides access to a rear garden.

The appeal property is located in a mixed use area. [address] comprises a street of modern brick-built semi-detached dwellings and nearby, across [address] and along nearby [address] there are Victorian terraced dwellings. On the opposite side of [address], to the south and rear of the appeal property, are industrial and commercial buildings, whilst to the north of the appeal property, beyond [address], is a large area of greenspace.

During my site visit, I observed that many dwellings in the area have been altered and/or extended. Whilst this results in many individual dwellings having a distinctive appearance, the common use of red brick provides for a sense of uniformity.

The proposed development would comprise a single storey side extension. It would be modest in scale and simple in form. Garden land would be maintained to the front, side and rear of the dwelling. The proposal would utilise building materials to match the host dwelling.

Given the above, I find that the proposal would not appear visually intrusive, but rather, it would appear as a modest addition in proportion with the host dwelling and in keeping with its surroundings.

Consequently, I find that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the area and that it would not be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Core Strategy1 Policy DM1; to UDP2 Policy DC1; or to the Council’s Guide to Development in Manchester Supplementary Planning Document and Planning Guidance (2007), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.

The proposed extension would result in the loss of the driveway to the side of the dwelling. During my site visit I observed that this driveway comprises a tight space in an awkward location, such that it requires a vehicle to cross the pavement at an angle, requiring manoeuvring onto the highway at the junction of [address] and [address], close to the junction of [address].

In the above regard, I note the appellant’s reference to not using the driveway because it is much easier to park elsewhere. In this respect, during my site visit I noted the presence of numerous available on-street parking spaces within easy walking distance of the appeal property.

Given the above, I find that the loss of a single awkward parking space would not harm highway safety. I am also mindful that it would reduce the scope for awkward manoeuvring in the immediate vicinity of highway junctions.

Taking the above into account, I find that the proposed development would not harm highway safety and that it would not be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework or to Core Strategy Policy DM1; to UDP Policy DC1; or to the Council’s Guide to Development in Manchester Supplementary Planning Document and Planning Guidance (2007) which together amongst other things, seek to ensure highway safety.

I have considered the conditions against the tests set out in Paragraph 57 of the Framework. I find that a condition specifying materials is necessary in the interests of local character.

A condition in respect of the use of the development is necessary in the interests of preventing a proliferation of HMOs and short term lets restricting housing choice and adversely affecting sustainability; and in the interests of residential amenity, to safeguard the character of the area and to maintain the sustainability of the local community through the provision of accommodation that is suitable for people living as families. 1 Manchester Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document (2012). 2 The Unitary Development Plan for the City of Manchester (1995).

A condition in respect of preventing the insertion of windows or doors into the elevations of the development other than those shown on the approved plans is necessary in the interests of residential amenity and local character.

For the reasons given above, the appeal is successful.

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

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

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015(as amended) (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no part of the development shall be used for any purpose other than the purpose(s) of Class C3(a) of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning ([name]) Order 1987 (as amended) (or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification). For the avoidance of doubt, this is use by a single person or by people living together as a family.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no windows or doors shall be inserted into the elevations of the extension hereby approved other than those shown on approved plan Existing and [name] and Elevations (Reference: 1433 Planning). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------