Appeal 6000687

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for single-storey rear extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, ref W/25/0521, 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 drawing no: MRH702-002B.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of occupiers of [address] (no 11), having particular regard to outlook and light.

The appeal site comprises a semi-detached dwelling, sited within a generous plot, with a wide rear garden. The dwelling currently benefits from a conservatory and a deeper single-storey rear extension, which together span the full width of the property. No 11 forms the other half of the semi-detached pair, with the existing conservatory on the appeal dwelling positioned alongside and slightly set in from the shared boundary with this neighbouring property.

The single storey extension would be deeper, than the conservatory that it would replace. There would also be a slight increase in mass including from the proposed development’s flat roof form and solid side elevation. It would also sit closer to the shared boundary and would intersect the suggested 45-degree line set out in the Warwick District Council Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2018) (SPD) when taken from the window of the nearest habitable room serving no 11.

However, as [name] of the SPD confirms, individual site circumstances will be taken into account, and the application of the 45-degree guideline will not necessarily be the overriding consideration. In this particular instance, given the established relationships with the intervening boundary fence and conservatory, the development’s single storey scale and that the nearest window at No 11 is large and looks down a wide rear garden, occupiers of this neighbouring dwelling would still be afforded a suitably spacious outlook.

Furthermore, the appellant has provided a Daylight and [name] which demonstrates that the proposed development would have a very modest effect on the amount of daylight received at No 11, and no discernible effect on the amount of sunlight received. There is no contrary evidence to suggest the findings of this report cannot be relied upon. Indeed, from my own observations the scale of the proposal, together with the siting of No 11 to the south of the appeal site and accounting for the natural path of the sun, these factors also indicate that there would unlikely be any material effects on light at No 11.

Overall, the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address], having particular regard to outlook and light. In that regard it would comply with Policy BE3 of the Warwick District Local Plan (2017) which requires development to have an acceptable impact on the amenity of nearby residents.

Other than the standard time limit condition, it is necessary to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plan for the reason of certainty. The approved plan confirms that the extension will be carried out in facing brickwork to match the existing dwelling. Therefore, a condition relating to matching materials is not necessary.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed.