N8te

Hi all, In short I made an application for a two storey side extension last year which was refused for various reasons which I appealed and the appeal was dismissed for a different reason, but both relating to the character of the street. I'm not going to die on this hill if I'm wasting my time but one aspect of the decision is still bothering me. My next door neighbour had an extension approved (prior to me moving in) for what is a rather unconventional looking extension (putting it politely) and the reason the planners allowed it was explained: “Whilst it is acknowledged that no other property has a similar extension, the character of the cul-de-sac, is vernacular and of no particular merit worthy of retention.” However my refusal was based on the impact on the character of the area (because the gaps between the houses was being made smaller) which to me is a direct contradiction to the reason next door's was passed. The cul-de-sac I live on isn't great visually with all houses being concrete/brick 1950's semi's with a whole variety of extensions (none of which are the same) so I was surprised the planners are so dead against mine particularly as nobody in the street objected to it. The town council did object but their reasons were not material. Now the appeal has been dismissed is that it? The original decision was littered with errors and made no reference to the neighbour's determination so I assumed the appeal would be upheld due to the lack of consistency with my decision. Should it not not have been explained to me in both the original decision and the appeal why they have contradicted the earlier planning decision that the road has no merit? I appreciate they are not bound by earlier decisions but as the decision is so different surely they should have explained the volte face? Happy to provide any documents or explain anything further. Thanks for any advice anyone is able to offer, Nathan