A BOLD yet controversial plan to extend a home on a sought-after road in a Petersfield conservation area has been rejected.

“We should celebrate, not obliterate Petersfield’s heritage” was the plea from an objector when plans to extend 11 The Avenue came before East Hampshire District Council (EHDC).

Plans to add a “contemporary” two-and-a-half storey extension to the side of the Arts and Crafts style house were recommended for permission, with officers lauding the “careful thought and originality” of the designs.

They also felt the gabled extension, which would be faced with terracotta tiles and red Hampshire brick, would complement and provide balance to the left hand side of the building.

Members of the EHDC Planning Committee heard the owners bought the property with the intention of extending it as plans to add a three-storey extension were approved in 2013, only for permission to elapse.

“Our aim is for a high quality of architecture that reflects its own era but doesn’t dilute its own fabric,” said the applicant, Nadim Khattar.

But his enthusiasm was not shared by several members, with Councillor Keith Budden comparing the extension to a “troublesome teenager who is rebelling against its surroundings.”

“It’s a big statement, bold and brave, but it fundamentally doesn’t work, despite the good motives,” said Councillor Ferris Cowper.

“It looks like someone stuck a bit of Lego on the side. It’s a bolt-on.”

James Deane, representing Petersfield Town Council (PTC), which opposed the application, said the proposals failed to meet a number of policies.

He said: “Whilst we are sympathetic to the applicants’ vision, PTC objects on the grounds of overdevelopment and for not making a positive contribution to the character of The Avenue or the conservation area.”

Petersfield Rother ward district councillor, Bob Ayer, told the committee early on that he supported the application but played very little part in the debate.

In the end just two supported the recommendation for approval while nine objected during last Thursday’s meeting in Penns Place.

They rejected it on the grounds that the application failed to improve, enhance or preserve the character, heritage or appearance of the conservation area.

However, talk of an appeal was rife following the decision.