Appeal 6004116

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for changes to fenestration, new single storey front porch, part single storey part two storey rear extension at [site address] , [site address] , Surrey [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/P/00637, 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 the following approved plans: 210-100, 411-100, 412-100, 412-101, 412-102 and 413-100.

The appeal proposal includes a number of elements which are not part of the Council’s reason for refusal, nor does the Council identify any conflict with the development plan in relation to these aspects of the proposal. Following my site visit I see no reason to conclude otherwise. Therefore, the focus of this appeal is the ground floor element of the rear extension.

I have been provided with the decision notice and plans for a single storey rear extension at the appeal property; it was determined that prior approval is not required1. I have taken this into account, but this does not alter my overall

The main issue is the effect of the ground floor element of the rear extension on the living conditions of the occupants of [address], with particular reference to outlook. 1 Reference 26/W/00005

The appeal property is semi-detached. It has a staggered rear elevation at ground floor level and the part nearest to the common boundary with No 80 is set back slightly from this adjoining semi-detached property. There is a two-storey rear extension at No 80 on the western side of the property.

Given the staggered rear elevations of Nos 78 and 80, the full depth of the ground floor extension would not be apparent from the neighbouring property. Furthermore, the proposed roof would slope away from No 80 which would provide an acceptable separation between the bulk of the roof and the neighbouring property. For these reasons, the proposal would not be unduly dominant or unacceptably affect the outlook of the occupants of No 80, which would accord with the advice in the Guildford Borough Council Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2018).

I conclude that the ground floor element of the rear extension would not result in unacceptable harm to the living conditions of the occupants of No 80, with particular reference to outlook. As such, it would accord with policies D5 and H4 of the Guildford Local Plan: Development Management Policies (2023). These policies seek, amongst other things, to avoid having an unacceptable impact on the living environment of existing residential properties.

I acknowledge the concerns raised by Worplesdon Parish Council regarding the size, scale and bulk of the proposed extension. I have taken these concerns into account, but this does not change my overall conclusion.

In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed a condition specifying the approved plans as this provides certainty.

For the above reasons, the proposal accords with the development plan. Material considerations do not indicate a decision should be taken other than in accordance with the development plan. I therefore conclude the appeal should be allowed.