Two storey extension: new dining room with enlarged bedroom above conservatory reconstructed and enlarged for new kitchen and adjacent utility room

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 16 January 2019 by G Roberts BA (Hons) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 6th March 2019 Appeal Ref: APP/U1105/D/18/3216836 19 King Alfred Way, Newton Poppleford, Sidmouth, EX10 0DG • 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 Mrs Helen Marks against the decision of East Devon District Council. • The application Ref 18/1849/FUL, dated 2 August 2018, was refused by notice dated 26 September 2018 • The application sought planning permission for a two storey extension: new dining room with enlarged bedroom above conservatory reconstructed and enlarged for new kitchen and adjacent utility room. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for two storey extension: new dining room with enlarged bedroom above conservatory reconstructed and enlarged for new kitchen and adjacent utility room at 19 King Alfred Way, Newton Poppleford, Sidmouth, EX10 0DG in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 18/1849/FUL, dated 2 August 2018, and subject to the conditions listed below: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. 2) All new external work shall match existing in respect of materials used and finished appearance, except where indicated otherwise on the approved plans. 3) The development shall conform in all aspects with the plans listed below, received by the local planning authority on the 8 August 2018. Location Plan Proposed Floor Plan Drawing No. NP-HM-08B Proposed Floor Plan Drawing No. NP-HM-09A Existing Combined Plan Drawing No. NP-HM-06 Proposed Elevation Drawing No. NP-HM-10B Main Issue 2. The main issue is the impact of the proposed single storey side extension on the living conditions of the occupants of 15 King Alfred Way. Appeal Decision APP/U1105/D/18/3216836 2 Reasons 3. Planning permission to extend the appeal site, through the construction of a two-storey front and single storey side extensions, was granted by the Council under reference 18/0865/FUL. During the implementation of that consent it was found that the height of the single storey side extension would need to change to accommodate a roof light and matching roof tiles. These changes resulted in an increase in the proposed roof pitch as well as the overall height of the single storey extension. 4. The Council argue that the increase in the height of the single storey side extension has a significant impact on the living conditions of 15 King Alfred Way (No.15). The single storey side extension has largely been constructed. On my site visit, it was covered in blue tarpaulin with only the roof tiles, as shown on the submitted plans, missing. 5. The proposed extension is clearly visible above the existing timber boundary fence when viewed from the kitchen window at No 15. The eaves of the extension is set marginally above the top of the boundary fence, with gradually more of the extension revealed as the pitched roof extends up to the main rear wall of the house. 6. The submitted plans show that a conservatory, which this side extension replaced, would also have been visible above the boundary fence and according to the appellants it had a solid, not opaque, side panel. I have no reason to disagree. In this context, the proposed development would not have a significantly greater impact than the pre-existing structure. In reaching this finding I have had regard to the level changes that exist between No.15 and the appeal site. 7. As the extension is virtually completed its impact on No.15 can clearly be assessed on site. Both the rear kitchen room and the outdoor amenity area to No.15, with the extension in place, still receive an acceptable level of sunlight and daylight, as well as enjoying a good outlook, which will be assisted by the proposed cream render finish to the extension. The proposed extension may be higher than that approved, but the impact of what has been constructed is acceptable for the reasons given. 8. I conclude therefore that the appeal proposals do not materially harm the living conditions of No.15 and comply in this respect with Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 (January 2016), which seeks to ensure that the living conditions of adjoining occupiers are not adversely affected by new development. Other Matters 9. An interested party has raised concerns over the impact on the living conditions of the occupants of 11 King Alfred Way, which is separated from the appeal site by No.15. As it is further away from the appeal site and in view of the findings I have reached above, I am satisfied that there would be no material impact on this property. Conditions 10. The Council has not put forward any conditions. I have therefore considered what conditions should be imposed in line with the advice in paragraph 55 of Appeal Decision APP/U1105/D/18/3216836 3 the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018) and the Planning Practice Guidance on the use of planning conditions. 11. I consider that conditions should be imposed in relation to the requirement for external works to match existing and compliance with the approved plans. These conditions are necessary and reasonable in order to protect the living conditions of neighbours and the character and appearance of the area. Conclusion 12. For the reasons given above and having taken all the matters raised into account, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. G Roberts INSPECTOR