Appeal 6000810

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are: • the effect of the annexe on the character and appearance of the area; • the effect of the annexe on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers in relation to outlook and privacy; and • the effect of the annexe on the integrity of the River Wye Special Area of Conservation (SAC).

The application is for retrospective planning permission for an annexe building already erected in the rear garden of No 8, a semi-detached property in [address]. The building is essentially a mobile home of the type often found in residential mobile home parks, about 12.25 m by 6.20 m in size, 3.90 m to the ridge, 3.00 m to the eaves, brought to the site pre-constructed and installed on a concrete base with connections to mains services.

The long, tapering rear garden is of a fairly standard size for a traditional semi-detached house and the annexe building, sited a few metres from the back of the house, fills almost its entire width. It is sited hard up to the left-hand boundary with one corner of the annexe building only a metre or so away from the right-hand boundary with No 10, leaving only a narrow path to gain access to the remainder of the rear garden. The result is an awkward and cramped layout. The building forms an over large, visually overbearing and dominant structure to the rear of the host property, unrelated in architectural terms and being finished in light grey cladding with lightweight roof tiles is of contrasting materials to the brickwork and slate roof of No 8.

With nothing comparable in the vicinity, the annexe building causes significant harm to the character and appearance of the existing residential area in conflict with Policy SD1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan Core Strategy 2015 (the HLP) which requires development to create well integrated environments, taking into account the local context and site characteristics, and to respect the scale, height, proportions and massing of surrounding development.

The annexe building is sited hard up to the rear garden of No [address], rising above the boundary fence and with the window of the second bedroom facing into the rear garden, albeit with a bush providing some screening. On the other side, adjacent to No 10, the annexe building rises well above the low fence on the common boundary, the main bedroom window faces into the rear garden and the external stairs providing access into the annexe building also allows a clear view into the rear garden. The front elevation with its steps, small decked area and patio doors also allows clear views into the gardens of No [address] and No [address].

Whatever measures are taken to increase the height of boundary fences or install one-way or obscure glazing the annexe building causes significant harm to the living conditions of adjacent properties in relation to outlook and privacy. This conflicts with HLP Policy SD1 which requires proposals to safeguard residential amenity for existing and proposed residents.

The annexe building lies within the hydrological catchment of the [name] and may, in combination with other plans and projects, adversely affect its integrity. However, given the findings in relation to the other main issues, the matter has not been pursued further.

The annexe building provides suitable and convenient accommodation for family members related to the occupiers of No 8. However, this benefit is outweighed by the significant harm Identified in relation to the first two main issues and the associated conflict with the development plan.

The appeal should therefore be dismissed.