Single storey rear and side extension and loft conversion Decision

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 21 September 2018 by S Poole BA(Hons) DipArch MPhil MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 11th October 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/P0240/D/18/3205478 5 Wentworth Close, Toddington, Dunstable, Bedfordshire LU5 6AG  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 & Mrs R Cullen against the decision of the Central Bedfordshire Council.  The application Ref CB/18/00659/FULL, dated 15 February 2018, was refused by notice dated 25 April 2018.  The development proposed is a single storey rear and side extension and loft conversion Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host building and the surrounding area. Reasons 3. The appeal property is a 2-storey semi-detached house. It is situated in a residential close comprising semi-detached houses of similar age and appearance. This gives the area a sense of uniformity, which is a matter to which I attach significant weight. The property has been extended to the side and rear at ground and first floor levels and a porch has been added at the front. To a degree these additions have disrupted the unity of the area and the symmetry of the semi-detached pair of houses of which the appeal property forms part. 4. The proposal would comprise a part single, part 2-storey and part 3-storey rear extension, together with a single story side addition within the space between the flank elevation of the property and its side boundary. I note that these additions would have a negligible impact on the appearance of the property when viewed from the road. 5. However, due to its height, bulk and siting the stepped rear extension would severely unbalance the appearance of the rear of the semi-detached pair. In particular the second floor level element would disrupt the roof form of the pair of houses and would be a wholly incongruous addition in this location, which generally comprises houses that retain their original simple roof form. 6. For these reasons I conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the host building and the Appeal Decision APP/P0240/D/18/3205478 2 surrounding area. It is therefore contrary to Policies BE8 and H8 of the South Bedfordshire Local Plan Review (2004) which seek development that complements and harmonises with the local surroundings, and extensions that take full account of the character of a site and its surroundings. There is also conflict with the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework and the design principles outlined within the Central Bedfordshire Design Guide (2014). Conclusion 7. For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail. S Poole INSPECTOR