Appeal 3274040

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for part single part two storey side and rear extensions. Changes to fenestration and removal of chimneys. New loft extension with side dormers. New enclosed porch with pitched roof at [site address] , Golders Green, London [postcode] in accordance with the application, Ref 20/6323/HSE, dated 10 December 2020, subject to the schedule of conditions at the end of this decision.

The description of development in the heading above has been taken from the planning application form. However, in [name] of the appeal form it is stated that the description of development has not changed but, nevertheless, a different wording has been entered. Neither of the main parties has provided written confirmation that a revised description of development has been agreed. Accordingly, I have used the one given on the original application.

The development includes side and rear extensions, alterations to the roof, dormer windows, new porch and removal of chimneys. The reasons for refusal on the Council’s decision notice indicate that the roof extension and dormer windows is the matter in dispute. I have no reason to disagree with the Council’s conclusion that the rest of the proposed development is acceptable in planning terms. My reasoning below therefore relates to the alterations to the roof.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the host property and area.

I have been made aware of the planning history relating to the property which includes planning permission for side and rear extensions, a new porch and removal of chimneys and a Certificate of Lawful Development for alterations to the roof and dormer windows. Based on the evidence, including the Officer’s report, these schemes in combination would be similar to the appeal proposal before me.

The appeal property comprises a detached two storey dwelling located on a prominent corner in a residential area. The dwelling is rendered with varying roof designs with a lower ridge height to the rear. At the time of the site visit, construction work was taking place to the side and rear of the property.

Dwellings in the area are predominantly individual and vary in terms of design and size. Many properties have been extended and display dominant roof forms with dormer windows visible from the street, and there is considerable variation in their configuration.

The dormer windows proposed would change the form and appearance of the roof, but they would be set down from the ridge and set in from the sides and eaves leaving adequate roof slope around them. The size and position of the dormer windows would not unacceptably dominate the roof. Whilst the proposed development would change the form of the roof, I find that it would be proportionate to the size of the host property and would not be overly dominant.

The proposed development would represent an appropriate addition resulting in a consistent ridge line and modestly sized dormer windows. Whilst it would be visible from within the area, the resultant dwelling would not look out of context or incongruous when considering the varying design of roof forms and dormer windows present in the local area.

I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the character and appearance of the host property and area. It would accord with Policies CS1 and CS5 of the [name] (2012) and Policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2012) which, amongst other things, seek to create quality environments, developments to respect local context and distinctive local character and enhance the borough’s high-quality suburbs.

It would also accord with guidance contained within the Residential Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2016) which, amongst other things, requires dormer roof extensions to reflect the style and proportions of windows on the existing house and to be subordinate features.

I have considered the imposition of conditions in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. In addition to the standard time limit condition, I have imposed a condition specifying the relevant drawings as this provides certainty.

In the interests of safeguarding the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers conditions for obscure glazed windows and the prevention of the use of the flat roof as amenity space have been imposed.

For the reasons set out above the appeal succeeds.

The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location and Block Plan; [name] 002; Proposed Plan Drawing Number 003 Rev 6 and Existing and [name] 004 Rev 6.

The materials to be used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

The roof of the development hereby permitted shall not be converted or used as a balcony, roof garden or similar amenity or sitting out area.

The first floor and second floor windows facing [address] shall be non-opening and fitted with obscure glazing prior to occupation of the development and shall then be retained thereafter for the lifetime of the development.