Appeal 6006370

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a first floor side extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/2253/2 and the plans submitted with it, 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 Nos. 4116-1 [name] and First Floor Plan, 4116-2 [name] and [name], 4116-3 Existing & [name] and 4116-4 Proposed Block Plan & Site Location Plan.

The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling.

There is a discrepancy in the spelling of the appellant’s surname when comparing the Application Form to the Appeal Form. Given that the Appeal Form was completed by the appellant, I have utilised this spelling within the banner heading.

For clarity and brevity, I have used the description of development given on the Council’s Decision Notice in the banner heading above.

Since the Council determined the appeal proposals the Charnwood Local Plan 2021-2037 (CLP) has been formally adopted by the Council. Consequently, Policy CS2 of the Charnwood Local Plan Core Strategy and saved [name]/1 and H/17 of the Borough of Charnwood Local Plan that were referred to in the Decision Notice have been deleted. The only Development Plan Policies relied upon by the Council are Policies DS4 and T3 of the CLP 2021-2037. To ensure that the appellant is not disadvantaged they have been provided with an opportunity to comment on the relevance of the adoption of the CLP to the appeal proposals.

The Decision Notice refers to Policy DS5 of the emerging CLP 2021-2037. This design policy was re-numbered as Policy DS4 in the adopted version of the document.

The Decision Notice refers to the [name] (2020). This remains extant but has now been incorporated into Appendix 4 of the CLP 2021-2037 and therefore full weight is now attached to it.

Policy T3 of the CLP 2021-2037 relates to parking standards. Given that the Council’s refusal reason relates only to the effect of the proposals on the character and appearance of the area it is not considered that this policy is determinative in the case. Policy T3 will therefore not be considered further within my assessment.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

The appeal property is located within a suburban area which is characterised by relatively uniform detached properties that are evenly spaced. Dwellings are constructed in a red or orange brick with grey tiles utilised on the roofs which are of a gable end design. Many of the dwellings have single storey garages located to the side which are attached to a front porch and set slightly forward of the main two-storey front elevation. Some of the garages have been extended above with first floor extensions.

The appeal site reflects the characteristics of the surrounding dwellings although the side garage has been converted into habitable accommodation. The appeal scheme proposes a first floor extension over the full width of the single storey element. The extension would be completed in matching brickwork to the host dwelling with windows of a similar size to those in the existing dwelling to maintain uniformity. The dwelling is set over 1m from the side boundary ensuring that the consistent spacing between dwellings is retained.

The extension is neither set down or set back behind the existing first floor of the dwelling. This does not accord with the design guidance in Appendix 4 of the CLP 2021-2037 which indicates that side extensions should be clearly subservient so that the main property is the dominant building. However, non-subservient side extensions are commonplace in the locality to the extent that they are part of the character of the area. On my site visit I viewed examples of similar extensions at No’s 4, 11, 12, 13 and [address]. In this context the extended dwelling would fit comfortably within the street scene.

The Council is of the view that the guidance within Appendix 4 should be strictly applied as they indicate that all of the nearby extensions which are not subservient were approved prior to the adoption of the [name] in 2020. However, in this specific location extensions that are not set down or set back form part of the character of the area and therefore the appeal scheme would not be harmful in this context. Appendix 4 sets out design guidance to support policies within the CLP 2021-2037. As guidance, the intention is not for it to be applied strictly in all circumstances. In my view, given the number of similar extensions in the immediate street scene, this is a case where it would be inappropriate to strictly apply the guidance within Appendix 4.

The proposed extensions would maintain the character and appearance of the area and would therefore accord with Policy DS4 of the CLP 2021-2037. Amongst other matters, this policy requires new developments to make a positive contribution to Charnwood by responding positively to local distinctiveness and respecting and enhancing the character of the area.

In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out following the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty. A matching materials condition is required to ensure that the character and appearance of the area is maintained.

The appeal is allowed, subject to the conditions given above.