Single storey and balcony rear extension

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 23 October 2018 by J Bell-Williamson MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 07 November 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/X1545/D/18/3210093 4 The Green, The Street, Little Totham, Essex CM9 8NF  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 Daniel Tan against the decision of Maldon District Council.  The application Ref HOUSE/MAL/18/00378, dated 20 March 2018, was refused by notice dated 4 June 2018.  The development proposed is single storey and balcony rear extension. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for single storey and balcony rear extension at 4 The Green, The Street, Little Totham, Essex CM9 8NF. The permission is granted in accordance with the terms of the application Ref HOUSE/MAL/18/00378, dated 20 March 2018, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: A01. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. Preliminary Matter 2. A revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published on 24 July 2018. The content of the revised Framework has been considered but in light of the facts in this case it does not alter my conclusion. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposed balcony on the living conditions of the occupiers of Nos 3 and 5 The Green, with regard to privacy. Appeal Decision APP/X1545/D/18/3210093 2 Reasons 4. The appeal property is a two storey semi-detached dwelling with additional accommodation in the roof space, located in the village of Little Totham. No 4 is a modern property in a residential setting of similar property types set around a green space off the main road running through the village. 5. I agree with the Council that the single storey extension would be a modest and proportionate addition to the host dwelling. The Council’s principal concern relates to the first floor balcony, which forms part of the extension. 6. As the appellant contends, the appeal property includes existing rear-facing windows at first and second floor levels that enable views towards the neighbouring gardens to either side. However, the views from these are not directly comparable to those related to use of the proposed balcony. Any normal use of the rooms which these windows serve would not involve prolonged and direct views towards the neighbouring gardens. By contrast, the balcony is intended as an amenity space in its own right, which would facilitate elevated views across the rear of the neighbouring properties. 7. Nonetheless, views from the existing rear first floor bedroom window provide a good approximation of the views that are likely to be available from the balcony, due to the similar position and height, while allowing for the fact that the balcony would project further forward from this part of the rear elevation. I was able to gain such views during the inspection. 8. To the left is the garden of No 3, the adjoining dwelling. Aside from standing at the front edge of the balcony, views of No 3’s garden would in part be obscured by the adjacent gable of the appeal property. Moreover, the shared side boundary between Nos 3 and 4 includes extensive planting that shields the garden from any views from the elevated position of the balcony. As such, there would be no harmful overlooking of No 3’s garden. 9. To the other side, the front building line of the appeal property’s detached garage would be level with the rear elevation of the extended dwelling and adjacent to the boundary with the neighbouring property, No 5. Due to its position, size and particularly the height of the garage’s pitched roof, it would obscure views of No 5’s rear garden resulting in no loss of privacy from use of the proposed balcony. 10. Accordingly, for the above reasons, I conclude that the proposed balcony would not harmfully effect the living conditions of the occupiers of Nos 3 and 5 The Green, with regard to privacy. Consequently, the proposal is not contrary to Policy D1 of the Maldon Local Development Plan, which concerns design quality, including the requirement that development should protect the amenity of surrounding areas. This policy is consistent with the Framework. 11. In reaching this conclusion I have taken account of the representation made by the Parish Council, which relates to the main issue. Conditions 12. Of the Council’s suggested conditions I have imposed the standard time condition and, to ensure the proper implementation of the proposal, one requiring development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. Appeal Decision APP/X1545/D/18/3210093 3 I agree also that a condition requiring the external materials used to match those of the existing building is needed in the interests of the appearance of the host dwelling and wider area. 13. For the reasons given above it is concluded that the appeal should succeed. J Bell-Williamson INSPECTOR