Part two/part first floor side extension, single storey rear extension and alterations to fenestration following demolition of existing single storey rear projection

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 22 February 2017 by C J Anstey BA (Hons) DipTP DipLA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Decision date: 21st March 2017 Appeal Ref: APP/K3605/D/17/3167221 14 Summer Gardens, East Moseley, KT8 9LT  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mr Ian Fordyce against the decision of Elmbridge Borough Council.  The application Ref 2016/2403, dated 1 August 2016, was refused by notice dated 30 November 2016.  The development proposed is part two/part first floor side extension, single storey rear extension and alterations to fenestration following demolition of existing single storey rear projection. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for part two/part first floor side extension, single storey rear extension and alterations to fenestration following demolition of existing single storey rear projection at 14 Summer Gardens, East Moseley, KT8 9LT, in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2016/2403, dated 1 August 2016, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans: OS Map, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07 and 08. 3) No development shall commence until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Main Issue 2. The effect on the appearance of 14 Summer Gardens and on the street scene. Reasons 3. No.14 Summer Gardens is a semi-detached house situated on a residential street. The proposed extensions include a first floor and two-storey extension to the side and a single storey extension to the rear. Appeal Decision APP/K3605/D/17/3167221 2 4. The proposed extension has been designed to be in keeping with the appearance of 14 Summer Gardens in terms of scale, size, height, roof form, and materials. Consequently the extension would blend in well with the appearance of the existing house. 5. The appeal property sits at an angle to Summer Gardens and its front corner is located further back from the street than the front elevation of no. 15 Summer Gardens, the adjoining house. This means that the proposed side extension, which would be set well back from the front elevation of no.14, would not be particularly noticeable from the street. Any change to the symmetrical appearance of no. 14 and the adjoining semi-detached house, no.13, would not be readily discernible from the road. Given the limited views available from Summer Gardens it is not considered that there is a need for the addition of a first floor window in the front elevation of the proposed side extension. In the light of these findings no material harm to the street scene would arise as a result of the development. 6. I conclude, therefore, on the main issue that the proposal would not have an unacceptable impact on the appearance of 14 Summer Gardens or on the street scene. This means that the proposed development accords with Policy DM2 Design and Amenity of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 which is consistent with the contents of the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposal also accords with the objectives of the Council’s Design and Character Supplementary Planning Document and its Home Extensions Companion Guide. These findings constitute compelling grounds for allowing the appeal. None of the other matters raised outweigh the considerations that have led to this decision. 7. Conditions are required to ensure that development is carried out in accordance with the submitted plans and that the materials used match the existing dwelling. Christopher Anstey Inspector