Appeal 3374878

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a single storey front extension and a double storey side extension at [site address] , Liverpool [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25H/1898, subject to the following condition:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: L4-0028 PLN 001 [name]; L4-0028 PLN 002 [name] and L4-0028 PLN 003 [name].

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

It is considered that the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, in particular the streetscene.

The appeal property is a 2-storey semi-detached dwelling situated at a road junction. The side elevation of the property is set back from the shared boundary with the footway along [address]. The distance this side elevation is set back from the footway is similar to the front elevations of 2 to [address]. The proposed erection of a 2-storey side extension at the property would result in the extended dwelling projecting forward of the front elevations of Nos. 2 to 6. There would be a gap of circa 1-metre between the flank wall of the resulting property and the shared boundary with [address].

The council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 1: [name] (SPG) refers to 2-storey side extensions to dwellings on corner plots not normally extending beyond the established building line to the return street frontage. The purpose of this guidance is to ensure that such extensions do not detract from the streetscene or create problems of driver visibility. However, the SPG is only guidance and cannot address all planning circumstances associated with proposals for side extensions. Even then, the reference to side extensions not normally extending beyond the established building line provides some flexibility in the application of the SPG’s guidance.

As referred to by the appellant and observed during the site visit, within the surrounding residential area some other dwellings at road junctions possess both 2-storey and single storey side extensions. The detailed planning circumstances of these other schemes have not been provided albeit some commentary has been given by the council. However, these extended dwellings do form part of the character and appearance of the surrounding residential area.

When viewed along [address] from the east, the 2-storey extension would be noticeable within the streetscene because of its projection forward of the front elevations of Nos. 2 and 6 and its proximity to the shared boundary with the footway. However, the proposed extension would be seen against the backdrop of the dwellings on the west side of the road, and it would not appear so conspicuous nor so visually prominent so as to cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the streetscene. The resulting property would not be out of keeping with other extended dwellings situated on corner plots within the surrounding area and, as such, there would not be unacceptable harm caused to the overall character of this residential area.

For the reasons given, it is concluded that the proposed development would not cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area, in particular the streetscene, and, as such, it would not conflict with Policies UD1, UD7 and H8 of the Liverpool Local Plan. Amongst other matters, these policies require extensions to be of a high quality of design that matches or complements the style of the dwelling and the surrounding area; be in keeping with the original dwelling and the surrounding area and respect the local grain and pattern of development so that the overall character of the area is retained.

The council has suggested conditions in the event that this appeal succeeds which have been assessed against the tests identified in the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance. For reasons of clarity, a condition is necessary to identify the approved drawings. It is also necessary for a condition to be imposed to ensure that the external materials of the proposed extension match the host property to assist with the resulting property’s assimilation into the surrounding residential area. Accordingly, it is concluded that this appeal should be allowed.