Single storey rear extension and incorporating existing outbuildings into main dwelling

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 14 February 2022 by Rebecca Thomas MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 05 April 2022 Appeal Ref: APP/J1915/D/21/3289148 2 The Close, Moor Green Road, Ardeley, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG2 7AN • 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 Eugene Flannery against the decision of East Herts Council. • The application Ref 3/21/1482/HH, dated 2 June 2021, was refused by notice dated 25 November 2021. • The development proposed is Single storey rear extension and incorporating existing outbuildings into main dwelling. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for Single storey rear extension and incorporating existing outbuildings into main dwelling at 2 The Close, Moor Green Road, Ardeley, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SG2 7AN in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 3/21/1482/HH, dated 2 June 2021, 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: GA 001 P rev 0 GA 002 PL rev 0; GA 003 PL rev 0; GA 004 PL rev 0; GA 005 PL rev 01; GA 006 PL rev 0; GA 007 PL rev 0; GA 008 PL rev 0. 3) All new external work and finishes and work of making good shall match existing original work adjacent in respect of materials used, detailed execution and finished appearance except where indicated otherwise on the drawings and application hereby approved. Procedural Matters 2. The Council finds in its decision that there would be a neutral impact upon the character and appearance of the Ardeley Conservation Area. Nonetheless, Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that, in the exercise of the statutory duty, with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area and so this shall remain part of my consideration. Appeal Decision APP/J1915/D/21/3289148 2 Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the Ardeley Conservation Area (CA). Reasons 4. The appeal site is mid-terraced two storey dwelling located at the edge of the Ardeley CA. It is a white painted rendered building, with a small outbuilding located to the rear. The dwelling benefits from a sizeable rear garden, set at an angle from the rear of the house. At the time of my site visit I was able to see a number of alterations being carried out to the neighbouring property. The proposed development would incorporate the existing outbuilding and provide a single storey extension to the rear of the dwelling. The development would provide a flat roof, with glazed doors to the rear and side elevations of the extension. 5. The proposal, whilst unusual in its layout, makes use of the plot shape and size, and respects the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and takes its cues from the shape of the existing outbuilding and layout, and would not detract from the original character or appearance of the dwelling. The use of timber boarding and glazing to the southern and eastern elevations would help to clearly identify the proposed development as later additions, with the single storey nature of the development limiting the impact to the house and terrace as a whole, whilst retaining an adequate amount of garden space to the rear. 6. Whilst the extension would be of a sizeable length, it remains within the confines of the space associated with the dwelling and its plot, and this combined with its limited height would respect the open nature of the local area. The proposal would be at best glimpsed and not easily visible from the street and would not interfere with the overall character and appearance of the CA, and whilst there is no positive enhancement or preservation, there is neither any harm identified to the CA. The scale of the development, being single storey and retained within the existing garden area would ensure that the plot and area would retain its open character. In addition to this, I was able to see the sporadic developments of smaller domestic budlings in the local area, such as garages and garden sheds, located beyond the extent of the development as proposed. 7. I therefore conclude that the proposal would be consistent with the preservation of the character and appearance of the Ardeley Conservation Area. It would comply with Policy HA4 of the District Plan1, which expects that (amongst other things) extensions to existing buildings will be permitted provided that the preserve or enhance the special interest, character and appearance of the area, including being complementary and sympathetic to the parent building. There would also be no conflict with Policies DES4 and HOU11 of the District Plan which expect new development to be of high standard of design and layout to reflect and promote local distinctiveness, to be of size, scale, mass form, siting and design appropriate to the character appearance and setting of the existing dwelling and surrounding area. The development would also accord with Sections 12 and 16 of the Framework, relating to design and the historic environment. 1 East Herts District Plan (October 2018) Appeal Decision APP/J1915/D/21/3289148 3 Other Matters 8. I note that there are concerns raised with regard to the impact of the development on sunlight to neighbouring gardens. Whilst the development would project beyond the existing outbuilding, it would remain of modest height and taking into account the orientation of the development on its own plot, would not impact on sunlight or outlook to occupiers of neighbouring properties. Conditions 9. In addition to the standard timescale for implementation condition, it is necessary to attach a condition to confirm the approved drawings in the interests of certainty. Given the nature of the proposed development and its location within a Conservation Area, I have considered it necessary to attach conditions relating to the materials to be employed in the construction. Conclusion 10. I have found neither harm to the setting of the Ardeley Conservation area nor the character and appearance of the host dwelling. I therefore conclude that, subject to the above conditions and having had regard to all other matters raised, the appeal is allowed. Rebecca Thomas INSPECTOR