Appeal 6001917

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a two-storey rear extension with chimney, loft conversion and installation of rear dormer windows, new porch, bay window and canopy, render all elevations at [site address] , Worcestershire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/01544/HP, 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’s: 4760-01 (survey as existing), 4760-06A (proposed extension), 4760-04E (proposed extension), 4760-05E (proposed extension), and the site location plan.

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted, the details set out in the submitted [name] shall be fully implemented and remain thereafter.

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.

I have taken the description of development from the Council’s decision notice. It was agreed between the Council and the appellant to amend the description during the application process, and it is clearer than that used on the original application form as to the precise nature of the development.

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

The appeal property is a detached two-storey dwelling house situated on a small modern housing estate. The main entrance to the property is centrally located under a small gabled timber porch, and there is a further gable to the left-hand side of the roof with a bay window to the ground floor below. There is a single brick chimney stack to the side of the property, and the front elevation is rendered.

Whilst there are differences in the appearances of the properties on the estate, there is an overall consistency in the materials palette creating a harmonious street scene. Namely, this is the use of render to alternate dwellings, the use of green uPVC trim to doors and windows, which are complemented by the limited variation in built form. The wider setting of the appeal site is characterised by its linear, roadside built form and the rural nature of the fields beyond the pattern of development. The appeal site is not located within a conservation area.

The Council’s delegated report is clear that the proposed rendering of all elevations, rear dormer windows, proposed front porch and bay window are all acceptable components of the overall proposed development. Having considered these elements, I have no reason to disagree with their conclusion.

It is acknowledged that the proposed extension would not include a step down from the existing ridge height as per the guidance in the [name] Planning Document (2018) (SPD). Despite this, the bulk of the proposed extension would be read in the context of the existing two-storey rear projecting elements on the neighbouring and surrounding properties. Indeed, the chosen depth of the proposed rear extension would still preserve the existing staggered rear building line created by the houses and garages and thus integrate effectively within the rhythm of development.

The appeal site is located on a no-through road, and is situated away from the main setting of the village. The appreciation of the proposed development would therefore be limited to its localised setting, primarily to the other properties along [address] and the dwellings which back onto the appeal site’s rear garden. The intervening distance between the appeal site and these dwellings would reduce any visual effect of the resulting increased footprint, and as above, the proposal would be coherent with the existing built form of the row.

Despite the large scale of the proposed development, the design of the rear extension is sympathetic to the host dwelling and indeed to the remainder of the modern development surrounding it, preventing any sense of incongruity. The use of a pitched roof design complements the existing roofline and will allow the resultant structure to be read harmoniously. It is further proposed to use a complementary materials palette, which will enable the rear extension to assimilate well within the street scene.

Overall, I find that the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore comply with Policy SWDP21 of the South Worcestershire Development Plan (2016) which requires all development to integrate effectively with its surroundings. It further complies with Policy TOAD9 of the Ombersley and Doverdale Neighbourhood Development Plan 2020-2030 (2021) which requires all development to take account of the character and the surrounding built environment with regard to styles and materials.

A third-party representation has been made regarding whether the scheme has received consent from the original developers of the estate. However, this is not a matter that can be considered under the appeal process and is a private matter for the appellant to consider.

There have been third party representations made regarding harm to the living conditions of neighbouring properties having reference to outlook, privacy, and light. The Council raised objections on these matters during the determination of the previous planning application (W/20/01163/HP). The Council were satisfied that these matters were resolved as a result of the reconfiguration of the proposed scheme, and I see no reason to disagree.

Representations have been made regarding the impact during the construction of the proposed development. However, any inconvenience for occupiers of neighbouring properties relating to construction of the proposed development would likely be short-term and a private matter between neighbouring parties as would any damage caused to neighbouring property or access issues to facilitate development works. I have determined therefore that a construction management plan is not necessary in this instance. Furthermore, the Council have not raised any issues with regard to highway safety, and there is no evidence before me to suggest that I should reach a different conclusion.

The Council have recommended a condition relating to the provision of a sustainable drainage system (SuDS) to secure the installation of two rainwater butts, a new soakaway and the use of permeable paving to create the proposed new car parking space. This condition aligns with the water management statement (2025) provided by the appellant, and I agree that it also aligns with SWDP29 which requires all development to manage surface water through SuDS and to protect water quality. Therefore, I have attached a suitably worded condition.

The proposed development would be in accordance with the development plan and so for the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that 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.