Removal of the existing brick built out house to the west of the property and replacement with a two storey side extension with pitched roof

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 22 December 2022 by Mr C Parker BA(Hons) PGCert MA MRTPI MCMI IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 05 January 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/E2205/D/22/3305474 71 Essetford Road, Ashford, Kent, TN23 5BP • 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 Jamie Henderson against the decision of Ashford Borough Council. • The application Ref 22/00580/AS, dated 10 April 2022, was refused by notice dated 14 June 2022. • The development proposed is described as ‘Removal of the existing brick built out house to the west of the property and replacement with a two storey side extension with pitched roof’. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on character and appearance of the street scene. Reasons 3. The appeal building is an end of terrace located within a residential area of Ashford and on the corner of Deans Walk and Essetford Road. Most of the nearby buildings appear to have been built in the same style as the appeal building. Whilst some of these have been extended, the extensions tend to be single storey front or side extensions. 4. The proposed development seeks the erection of a two storey side extension which would be angled so as to align with the corner plot. I acknowledge that the scheme seeks the use of matching materials which would, over time, integrate the development with the host building and wider street scene. 5. However, the continuation of the ridge and eaves height and alignment with dwellings facing onto Deans Walk means that the proposed extension would fail to appear as a subservient addition to the host building. In practical terms, this would mean that the extension would appear as a poorly proportioned addition to the host building rather than as a subservient two storey addition. This additional bulk to the host building would be further exacerbated by the lack of two storey extensions within the locality which would heighten its visual incongruity in the street scene. Appeal Decision APP/E2205/D/22/3305474 2 6. I note that a neighbouring occupier has written in support of the proposal. The Appellant has also indicated that they believe they could extend the building under permitted development rights with single storey extensions. That may be so, but it is not the scheme before me which I have determined on its own planning merits. 7. I therefore find that the proposal would have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of both the host building and on that of the street scene. It would therefore be contrary to Policies SP6 and HOU8 of the Ashford Local Plan 2030, which, amongst other aims, seek to permit extensions if the proposed extension is designed to ensure it does not result in significant harm to the overall character and appearance of the area. 8. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. C Parker INSPECTOR