Two storey side extension

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 18 December 2024 by D Cramond BSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 09 January 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/C3810/D/24/3348903 2 Alfriston Close, Felpham, PO22 6QB • 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 Harry Wright against the decision of Arun District Council. • The application Ref is FP/57/24/HH. • The development proposed is a two storey side extension. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the locality. Reasons Character and appearance 3. The appeal property is a detached two storey house on a corner plot facing the entrance to Alfriston Close which is a largely open plan housing development of similar nature. The side flank runs along Flansham Park which is a form of distributor road with more varied development generally set back behind verges and open areas. The locality is one of established residential character and the buildings, spaces and landscape come together to create an area of pleasing appearance. The proposed extension would be full height and about 5 metres in width. 4. To my mind a defining characteristic of this area is the sense of openness created because buildings are set back from roads. This property is in a prominent position and from both front and side (seen from either direction along Flansham Park) the space at its southern end makes a positive visual contribution to the locality. The streetscene would be markedly changed by a substantial built form on this space. Regrettably the scheme would be jarring on the eye and harmful to the visual merits of the wider area. The bulky development close to the highway would lack a suitable degree of subtleness and consideration of landscape. 5. Policies D DM1 and D DM4 of the Arun Local Plan and Policy ESD1 of the Felpham Neighbourhood Development Plan are relevant. Amongst other matters, these seek to ensure that development is of high-quality design with suitable scale and siting to be sympathetic to the character of a site and its Appeal Decision APP/C3810/D/24/3348903 2 surroundings and to deliver streetscene with an appearance which reflects the local area. I conclude that the proposal would run contrary to these policies. It would also conflict with the pertinent aesthetic objectives of the Arun Design Guide, albeit this document could not be expected to cover every eventuality. Other matters 6. I sympathise with the Appellant’s wish to extend to provide family accommodation and I can see that selection of materials has been thoughtful. I note that neighbours have not objected. I take the point that building lines meander and I have considered other properties drawn to my attention but I do not find anything directly comparable by reason of siting, size or design. In any event I have to assess this proposal on its own merits. I have carefully considered all the points raised by the Appellant but taken individually or together these matters do not outweigh the concerns which I have in relation to the main issue identified above. I do hope that a mutually agreed outcome can be found which might embody an extension in a different form. 7. The National Planning Policy Framework has been considered and the development plan policies which I cite mirror relevant objectives within that document. Overall conclusion 8. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal proposal would have unacceptable adverse effects on the character and appearance of the locality. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. D Cramond INSPECTOR