Appeal 3373369

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of single and 1.5 storey rear extensions to provide additional living accommodation. Erection of first floor front extension and installation of front dormer to facilitate loft conversion and creation of front porch. Erection of 1.5 storey side extension to create double garage with additional living accommodation and alterations to widen the existing driveway at [site address] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P25/00647/HH, 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 accordance with drawings: block plan; proposed south and north elevations; proposed west and east elevations; proposed ground floor plan; proposed first floor plan; and proposed roof plan.

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

No development within the front driveway area as shown on the approved block plan drawing shall take place until samples of all surfacing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved sample details.

The description of development in the banner heading is taken from the application form. However, the Council has used a different form of wording on the decision notice. This more accurately describes the proposed development and therefore I have used it in my formal decision. I have adjusted the wording to include the widening of the existing driveway which forms part of the scheme.

The Council raises no concerns over the proposed widening of the driveway and based on my observations at the site visit I have no reason to disagree. The main issue in dispute is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing building and the surrounding area.

No [site address] is located within a residential context, characterised by a mix of 2 storey, 1.5 storey and single storey detached dwellings, set within spacious plots with low boundary treatment. Turning into [name], the properties largely comprise single and 1.5 storey dwellings, with characteristic front gable projections of varying styles and proportions. Whilst there is variation with regards to these features, there is a general consistency to building lines, massing, architectural detailing and materials within the locality. The overall uniformity makes a significant positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site comprises a spacious plot, sited within the cul-de-sac end of [name]. The detached dwelling is generously set back from the road, with substantial landscaping to the front garden area.

The proposed pitched roof dormer would be similar in design and appearance to existing dormers noted on my site visit within the immediate adjoining area. This includes two front dormer windows at [address] Bank. The proposed pitched roof dormer is appropriately designed and would appear subservient within the front roof slope of no 15.

There is a prevalence of front extensions within the locality, which includes no’s 3 and 4 which are sited more prominently within the approach into [name]. The appeal property is set back significantly from the public realm, and a large area of landscaping would be retained to the front garden area. Consequently, the front alterations are acceptable additions to the property which would not appear discordant with the overall design of the host dwelling or the character and appearance of the area.

Whilst substantial, the proposed side addition would appear subservient to the detached, host property by way of its reduced height from the main roof ridge line in combination with a generous set back from the side boundary with [address] Bank.

The proposed rear extensions would be subservient to the host dwelling in terms of proportion and massing. They would be glimpsed from adjoining properties but would not be visible from the public realm due to the location of the property adjoining a stream and wooded area behind the rear garden. The discreet siting and subordinate appearance would combine to make these additions acceptable in visual terms.

The Council has referred to the Householder Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2021) (SPD). The SPD recognises the impact residential extensions have on a character of an area and seeks to amplify the development plan policies, encouraging high quality design. Among other requirements, the guidance states that proposals should be subservient in scale and character to ensure the prominence of the existing building is preserved, alongside responding constructively to the characteristics of the prevailing street scene. Although the Council draws attention to a breach of the guidance on side extensions, I am satisfied that cumulatively the extensions maintain the prominence of the existing building and the subservience sought by the Council. I am mindful that the SPD is guidance in any event and is not determinative. Its detailed application is context and site specific based on the circumstances of the case.

For the above reasons, I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the existing property and the surrounding area. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policy PSP38 of the [site address] Local Plan, [name] and Places Plan (2017) and Policy CS1 of the [site address] Local Plan, [name] (2013). These policies together seek to ensure that development within residential curtilages respects building line, form, scale and proportions.

To meet legislative requirements, a condition is imposed to address the period for commencement. I have also imposed a condition specifying the approved plans for certainty. Furthermore, a condition is necessary for materials to match those used on the existing house to maintain the character and appearance of the area. A condition is also imposed relating to the surface materials of the driveway. This is to ensure that a bonded material is used which will not be spilt onto the public highway and to ensure that the appearance is satisfactory.

The Council has recommended that a condition is included relating to the use of obscure glazing to the side elevation windows. Given that the windows to the south side elevation will be high level and at ground floor level this is not necessary. Furthermore, the two new rooflight windows to the front gable extension roof slope would not cause harm to privacy by way of overlooking to the adjoining neighbour given the siting of the front extension and relationship with the adjacent property. As such, the suggested conditions do not pass the test of necessity.

The proposal accords with the development plan taken as a whole and there are no other material considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, to suggest the decision should be made other than in accordance with it. Therefore, for the reasons given above the appeal is allowed.