Appeal 3372644

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for replacement of existing single-storey garage with two-storey garage and gym and erection of single-storey front extension and front porch cloakroom at [address], Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/01274/APP and [name] 001, dated 15 April 2025, submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out in the Schedule appended to this

The development description above reflects that set out on the decision notice as most clearly defining the appeal proposals.

The main issue is the effect the proposed built development would have on the character and appearance of the appeal property and the local area. I also consider its implications for neighbouring residential amenity.

The Council considers there to be no objection to the proposed front porch and cloakroom extension and I agree that it would be in keeping with the main house and have no adverse impact on the street scene.

The proposed two-storey replacement garage and gym building would be virtually of the scale and character of a dwelling. In its style and finishes, the outbuilding would match both its host dwelling and the closely adjacent terrace at Nos [address].

The present single-storey garage appears clearly subsidiary to the dwelling at No [site address] , whereas its brick-built, two-storey, pitch-roofed replacement would be seen as more closely related visually to the neighbouring terrace.

The chief question for this appeal is whether that altered visual relationship would have any unacceptably detrimental effect on the character, appearance or amenity of the appeal property or the wider street scene.

I consider that the proposed building would appear broadly in harmony with the street scene of [address]. Moreover, while seen in the context of the adjacent terrace, in scale it would still be subsidiary to the significantly larger dwelling at No [site address] , plainly sharing the parking and manoeuvring space along its flank frontage, within a well-defined and enclosed curtilage.

The Council accepts that the proposed building would have no harmful impact on neighbouring residential amenity with respect to such as light, privacy or dominance. In my consideration, neither would it be unduly intrusive in the outlook from any other property, given my prior finding that it would broadly harmonise with the prevailing street scene.

Notwithstanding the foregoing findings, it is appropriate that approval be conditioned to ensure that the use of the proposed outbuilding remains ancillary to No [site address] , as proposed, with no conversion or occupation as an independent dwelling or unit of rental accommodation. This is to protect the character of the site and surroundings.

Further conditions are appropriate, as suggested without prejudice by the Council, to ensure that sufficient off-street car parking and manoeuvring space is maintained, in the interests of highway safety. In addition, in order to safeguard the privacy of neighbouring dwellings, no openings should be allowed in the south-west elevation of the new building and all first-floor windows in its south-east elevation should be obscure glazed with opening restricted. The standard condition on the use of matching finishing materials should also be applied.

For the reasons explained and subject to those conditions, I consider the appeal proposal to be compliant with the relevant Policies BE2-3 of the adopted Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan, as supported by supplementary design guidance. Together, consistent with the national policy, these provide that new development should respect its site, local character and amenity, with outbuildings remaining subservient to their host.

Therefore, having also considered every other matter raised in the written representations, I conclude that this appeal should be allowed.