Single storey side extension with barn hip and small gabled roof to accommodate a garage; replacement of existing part-pitched and flat roof over existing side extension with barn hip and small gabled roof to match the proposed

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 25 February 2020 by Emma Worby BSc (Hons) MSc Decision by V Lucas LLB (Hons) MCD MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 March 2020 Appeal Ref: APP/G2245/D/19/3241985 1 Squires Field, Hextable BR8 7QY • 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 Guy Brown against the decision of Sevenoaks District Council. • The application Ref 19/02500/HOUSE, dated 29 August 2019, was refused by notice dated 19 November 2019. • The development proposed is a single storey side extension with barn hip and small gabled roof to accommodate a garage; replacement of existing part-pitched and flat roof over existing side extension with barn hip and small gabled roof to match the proposed. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey side extension with barn hip and small gabled roof to accommodate a garage; replacement of existing part-pitched and flat roof over existing side extension with barn hip and small gabled roof to match the proposed at 1 Squires Field, Hextable BR8 7QY in accordance with the terms of the application 19/02500/HOUSE, dated 29 August 2019, 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 following approved plans: 19-0593 D01A, 19-0593 D02, 19-0593 D03, 19-0593 D04, 19-0593 D05, 19-0593 D06, 19-0593 D07. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the proposed development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 4) Prior to any works above ground level, details of both soft and hard landscaping shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The landscaping works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before any part of the development is first occupied in accordance with the agreed scheme. Appeal Procedure 2. The site visit was undertaken by an Appeals Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. Appeal Decision APP/G2245/D/19/3241985 2 Main Issue 3. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons for the Recommendation 4. The appeal property is a two-storey detached dwelling located on the junction of the cul-de-sac Squires Field and Main Road. Squires Field is made up of large detached dwellings in a spacious layout with grass verges and well-maintained landscaping. The appeal property has an existing single storey projection on the side elevation furthest from the road. The proposal would replace the flat roof on this single storey section with a half-hipped roof and introduce a further single storey side extension on the other side elevation, to be used as a garage. 5. The replacement roof over the existing side extension would match that of the main dwelling and although it would be significantly greater in height than the existing roof, the design and materials used would be in keeping with the appeal property and the surrounding area. 6. The proposed garage would be located directly adjacent to the road and would be in a prominent position with a greater impact upon the streetscene than the existing side extension. However, it would be well set back from the front elevation of the dwelling which would reduce its visual impact upon the public realm. It is also relatively modest in size, when compared with the large host dwelling, with a low eaves’ height and appropriate width for a single bay garage. Although above first floor level, the ridge height of the proposed garage would match that of the proposed replacement roof on the existing side extension and the roof would also be a half-hip to match existing roof forms. This would give the dwelling a symmetrical and well-balanced appearance and the hipped roof form would ensure that the proposal is not overly large or bulky in appearance. 7. As the surrounding dwellings within Squires Field have a loose knit and informal layout, the proposal would not disrupt any well-defined building lines and would not detrimentally reduce the gap between the appeal site and other neighbouring properties. It is noted that the proposal may result in the loss of a curved brick wall, a small tree to the side of the dwelling and part of the grass verge. However, these aspects do not currently provide a significant benefit to the character and appearance of the area. The appellant has also confirmed that the hedge to the side of the dwelling would be retained, which would further reduce views of the proposed garage from Squires Field and ensure that soft landscaping remain a prevalent feature within the streetscene. 8. Consequently, I conclude that the proposed development would not have a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the area. Therefore, the proposal would not be in conflict with Policy EN1 of the Sevenoaks Allocations and Development Management Plan (2015). This policy seeks to ensure that proposals create high quality design which would respond to the scale, height, materials and site coverage of the area. Other Matters 9. Third party representations to the original planning application have made reference to a covenant on the site and stated that a grass verge included Appeal Decision APP/G2245/D/19/3241985 3 within the proposal is not owned by the applicant. However, these are civil matters to which I cannot attach any significant weight, and these would not outweigh my finding on the main issue. 10. Other matters such as the impact upon on-street parking availability, highway safety and potential disruption to neighbouring residents during the construction period, have also been raised. However, due to the scale of the proposed development it is not considered that the proposal would have significant detrimental impact on these factors. It was also stated that the proposed garage may be used for additional living accommodation, however no evidence was provided to support this and therefore cannot be given significant weight. Conditions 11. In addition to the standard time period for commencement of the development, I have attached a condition requiring the development to accord with the approved plans, as this provides certainty. A condition requiring the use of materials matching that of the existing building is also necessary to ensure an appropriate appearance for the development. 12. The Council have suggested a condition requiring the appellant to submit a landscaping scheme to ensure that the development does not result in the erosion of the landscape. Due to the presence of existing landscaping features on the site which contribute positively to the streetscene, it is considered that this condition would be necessary. Conclusions and Recommendation 13. For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal is allowed. Emma Worby APPEALS PLANNING OFFICER Inspector’s Decision 14. I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed. V Lucas INSPECTOR