Appeal 6008882

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for single storey front, first floor side and two storey rear extensions at [site address] , Ambrosden, Bicester, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of application Ref 26/00169/F, subject to the conditions set out in the accompanying Schedule.

The description of the proposed development in the Council’s decision notice differs from that used in the planning application form. I have not been told whether the change was made by agreement between the parties. However, I have utilised the Council’s description since it more accurately describes that proposed.

The officer report clarifies that the Council has no objection to the proposed single storey front and two storey rear extensions proposed. I have no reason to question the assessment made by the Council’s officers in this regard, and this is reflected in

The main issue is the effect of the proposed first floor side extension on the character and appearance of the host property and its surroundings.

The appeal property is a semi-detached dwelling contained within a well laid out and established residential estate. The property forms one of a pair of 6 similar pairs of semi-detached dwellings sited along the southern frontage of [address]. The appellant seeks to build above the existing single storey structure at the side of the property and above a small part of the proposed single storey extension at the front, which is designed to partly wrap around the side elevation.

The finished product would therefore appear as a two storey extension running along the side elevation. I noted that three of the pairs along the frontage had been extended to the side at 2 storeys. However, this proposal differs from the others in that the extension would be stepped to coincide with the property’s site ownership boundary. The Council considers that the resultant design would be ‘odd, contrived and convoluted’ resulting in a discordant addition causing significant harm to the visual amenities of the area.

The street layout is such that the pairs of dwellings are staggered in relation to the road. Thus when approached from the south-east along [address], the gabled ends of the dwellings stand out prominently. The side extension to No 12 appears as a solid mass of unrelieved brickwork when viewed from this direction. Possibly more by accident than design, the proposed stepped extension would avoid this effect. Although different to the other extensions, the mass of brickwork seen on the neighbouring elevation would not be repeated. The mass would be effectively broken up by the stepped form and in combination with the use of render, a less visually dominant side elevation would result. A similar effect would be experienced when viewed from the front.

Accordingly, I do not share the Council’s design concerns and conclude that the proposed extensions as a whole would fit acceptably and unobtrusively into its visual context, without materially affecting the character and appearance of the host property or its surroundings. Accordingly, no conflict arises with those provisions of policies ESD15 of the Cherwell Local Plan 2011-2031 Part 1, and C28 and C30 of the Cherwell Local Plan 1996 directed to promote and encourage high quality design generally, and specifically in residential extensions.

In the interests of certainty, it is important that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, and a condition to this effect is imposed. A condition on materials is imposed in the interests of visual amenity. A further condition is imposed to protect the privacy interests of the residents of [address].

A neighbouring resident expressed certain concerns at application stage, and these are addressed in the officer report. I have no reason to disagree with the officer comments in this regard other than some of the concerns raised seem capable of being appropriately through other legislation, including the Party Wall Act 1996.

All other matters raised in the representations have been considered, including the content of the [name] 2018 and the highway comments, but none is of such strength or significance as to outweigh the considerations leading to my conclusions.

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: [name] 001 & 002 [name].

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing building.

Before the toilet/bathroom in the proposed rear extension is used, the window facing No [address] shall be obscurely glazed and this form of glazing shall be retained in perpetuity.