Appeal 3375687

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of a single storey front extension to form garage with pitched roof at [site address] , Surrey [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref: PLAN/2025/0382 subject to the following conditions:

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

The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: Site Location Plan, May 2025; Proposed Ground Floor Plan and Elevations – 1582/SH/1 Rev 2, June 2025.

The Council altered the description of the development during the consideration of the application to read ‘erection of a single storey front extension to form garage with pitched roof’. This is a more concise description of the proposal and removes superfluous text from that set out in the application form. I have taken the description above which also appears in the appeal form. I am satisfied therefore that the cases of the main parties would not be prejudiced by use of the above description. I have determined the appeal accordingly.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site is a detached two-storey dwelling located on the south side of Eastmead, a cul de sac of similar style and age of property constructed in the 1970s/80s as part of a wider estate. The estate has a relatively open plan feel with little definition between front gardens and the street.

Dwellings in this part of the estate typically have integral and attached garages.

The property has been extended in the past which included a garage conversion into habitable accommodation.

Policy CS21 of the [name] (WCS) states ‘proposals for new development should respect and make a positive contribution to the street scene and the character of the area in which they are situated, paying due regard to the scale, height, proportions, building lines, layout, materials and other characteristics of adjoining buildings and land’.

The dwelling has an unusual orientation onto the street scene with the side elevation (north) facing the street and the front elevation (west) facing onto an access drive which leads to further dwellings. The appeal site boundary to the front is a substantial hedge which wraps around the property to the south. This hedge is shown to be replaced with a six foot high close boarded fence.

The proposed extension would extend the existing front projection at single storey height towards the west. Although the proposal would elongate the building, it would respect the existing building line to the north and would remain subservient in height to the main dwelling. The proposed materials, eaves and ridge height would match those on the existing single storey projection and would therefore harmonise with and be sympathetic to the character and appearance of the dwelling and neighbouring properties.

The proposal would be partially screened to the west and to the south by the proposed fencing, although would be visible above the fence line. The existing dwelling would block views of the proposal from the east. The main view of the proposal would be from the north, but due to the positioning of the dwelling in the corner of the cul de sac and not at the head of the cul de sac, the dwelling does not feature prominently within the street scene.

Whilst there maybe no other examples of front extensions of this scale in the locality, the orientation of the dwelling and the subservient nature of the proposal to the main dwelling would prevent the proposal having a dominating effect on the street scene.

In conclusion, the proposal would have no significant effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area and would comply with policies CS21 and CS24 of the WCS which seek to conserve existing character and ensure new development pays due regard to the scale, height, proportions, building lines and materials of adjoining buildings.

I have had regard to the planning conditions that have been suggested by the Council and considered them against the tests in the Framework and the advice in the Planning Practice Guidance.

In the interests of certainty I have imposed a plans and materials condition.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.