Appeal 6002901

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for extensions and alterations including roof mounted solar panels at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2025/01587, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out in the schedule attached to this decision.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] (No.37), with particular regard to visual impact and loss of daylight/sunlight.

[address] is characterised by a diverse range of detached and semi-detached family dwellings with rendered, brick and/or tile hung walls under plain tiled and slate roofs. Plot sizes and the depths of the front and rear gardens vary on either side of the road. The appeal property is located towards the northerly end of [address] and occupies a generous sized plot, with deep front and rear gardens. The dwelling comprises a brick built detached two storey house with a plain tiled roof. It has been rather insensitively extended and altered over the years and is currently unattractive and visually unbalanced.

Collectively, the proposed changes to the host dwelling would enlarge and change its appearance. The proposed fenestration, detailing and materials would be consistent and the overall design and appearance of the dwelling would be materially improved. The proposed solar panels would be appropriately located on the side and rear roof slopes, where they would be largely screened from the street scene.

For these reasons I find that the proposal would update and improve the character and appearance of the dwelling, making a positive contribution to the street scene and improving energy efficiency.

This is subject to adherence to the palette and colour of materials set out in the submitted application form and Design and [name] to be used in the external surfaces and details of the resultant dwelling. Also, it is not possible to establish the impact of the solar panels on the host dwelling and the immediate area without details of their surface materials, colour, and method of attachment to the roof. These are matters that could be satisfactorily dealt with by conditions.

Accordingly, in this respect the proposal complies with policy DM4.of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (Part 2) (LP2); policy TD1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (Part 1) 2018 (LP1); and policies FNP1 & FNP16 of the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan (FNP). Collectively and amongst other things these policies; and paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), seek to ensure that new developments are of high quality design that responds to the distinctive local character of the area.

It is noted that the council has similarly raised no design concerns regarding the proposal. Their concern relates to the impact of the rear extensions on the living conditions of the occupiers of No.37.

LP2 Policy DM5 and FNP Policy FNP16 seek to protect the living conditions of existing residents from harm due to visual impact and/or loss of daylight/sunlight. Paragraph 135 f) of the Framework states that proposals should ensure that developments create places that promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. Sections 7 and 8 of the Waverley Borough Residential Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) are consistent with this.

Planning permission has already been granted for various changes to the dwelling including a large part two and part single storey rear extension in the same position as the current appeal scheme. The appellant has confirmed that this permission remains extant and is thus a material consideration in the assessment of the appeal proposal. With the approved scheme (WA/2024/02258), the eaves and ridge heights of the resultant dwelling would be 0.75 metres higher; the depth of the two storey element would be 0.95 meters shallower; and the single story element would be 0.5metres shallower than the current appeal scheme.

The appeal dwelling sits at a slightly higher level to the dwelling and rear garden at No.37. The proposed two storey rear extension would project approximately five metres beyond the rear building line of the dwelling at No.37. It would have an eaves height of under five metres and its relatively shallow pitched roof would be fully hipped up to its flat crown.

The proposed rear extension would be sited to the southeast of No.37 and approximately three metres from its closest rear facing window. This window serves a large kitchen living area that also benefits from double glazed doors in the rear elevation and windows in the side and front elevations.

Having viewed the appeal site from the rear garden of No.37 I do not consider that the proposed extension would have a noticeably greater impact on the outlook from the rear garden and rear facing rooms at No.37, than the approved scheme. Similarly, it would not have a material impact on the levels of daylight and sunlight they would receive. The increased depth of the proposed extension would be away from the main sitting out area and would not impact on daylight or sunlight close to the dwelling.

Clearly the proposed extension would have a far greater enclosing impact on the outlook from the rear facing rooms and garden at No,.37, than the existing tall boundary fence and tall planting. However, the lower height of the proposed two storey extension would slightly improve daylight and sunlight levels within the rear facing kitchen/living room and within the main sitting out area, when compared to the extant approved scheme. Also, the main outlook from the adjacent rear facing ground room and sitting out area at No.37 is over its wide rear garden. For these reasons, I do not consider that the occupiers of No.33 would experience a noticeable difference in daylight and sunlight levels within the rear facing rooms and sitting out area than with the approved scheme.

Currently the existing two storey rear extension is singularly unattractive and the first floor full height glazed doors in its side elevation are intrusive and create a sense of being over-looked. With the proposal these features would be removed. The only first floor window in the flank elevation of the proposed rear extension would serve a dressing room and could be obscure glazed. This is something that could be secured through the imposition of a

Finally, in their reason for refusal the Council has referred to policy TD1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan (Part 1) 2018 and FNP Policy FNP1. Whilst these policies do refer to the scale of new developments they do not specifically address the living conditions of the occupiers of adjacent dwellings. As such I feel that they are of limited relevance to the council’s reason for refusing the appeal application.

I conclude on the main issue that the proposal would not have a materially harmful impact on the living conditions of the occupiers of No.37 due to visual impact or loss of daylight/sunlight. Accordingly, the proposal complies with LP Policy DM5, FNP Policy FNP16, the SPD and paragraph 135 f) of the Framework.

[name] note that the proposed parking arrangements were approved under planning permission WA/24/02258, they are nonetheless an integral part of the current proposal. The parking and turning area would be needed to meet the needs of the occupiers of the resultant dwelling and visually they would blend in with the existing street scene. Their implementation and retention for the life of the development would however need to be secured by condition in the interests of highway safety and convenience.

The position of the proposed air source heat pump and air conditioning units is shown on the proposed site plan, although details of the noise they would emit have not been provided. Such details are required to protect the living conditions of the occupiers of [address]. This is something that can be secured through the imposition of a condition.

Finally, the views of the council and the appellants have been sought on the appropriateness of the suggested conditions and neither have raised any concerns.

Having regard to the conclusion on the main issue and all other matters raised the appeal is allowed.

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and details: Location Plan, 1722/S-01, 1722/S-02, 1722/S-03, 1722/S-05, 1722/P-101, 1722/P-102, 1722/P-103, 1722/P-104, 1722/P-105, and 1722/P-106.

The materials and finishes, including colours to be used in the external surfaces, drainage goods and fenestration of the extensions and alterations hereby approved shall adhere to the details set out both in the submitted Design and [name] dated August 2025 and on the application form.

The modified vehicular access, parking and turning areas hereby approved shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plan No.1722/P-101 within 6 months of the implementation of development, and thereafter shall be permanently maintained for their stated purposes.

Prior to the first use of the air conditioning unit (ACU) and air source heat pump (ASHP) hereby permitted, a scheme to ensure the rating level of noise emitted from the ASHP and ACU shall not exceed the prevailing background sound level, when measured in accordance with [name] BS4142:2014 at any adjoining or nearby sensitive premises, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The two storey rear extension hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the first floor dressing room window on the northern elevation of the extension has been fitted with obscured glazing, and no part of that window that is less than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which it is installed shall be capable of being opened. Details of the type of obscured glazing shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the local planning authority before the window is installed and once installed the obscured glazing shall be retained thereafter. ***End of Schedule***