Appeal 3276303

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for proposed single storey rear extension and proposed rear roof dormer extension and loft conversion to create additional habitable space. Front porch and external works at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/01025/HSE, dated 1 March 2021, subject to the following conditions;

The development hereby permitted shall begin not 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: [name] and [name] no. RELC/7LC/01; [name] no. RELC/7LC/02A; [name] and Site Plan Drg no. RELC/7LC/03.

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

The plans submitted with the application and appeal included a typographical error in respect of the labelling of the floor layout. As part of the appeal the appellant resubmitted the plan to rectify this error, no other amendments were made to the plans. The Council was given the opportunity to comment, and no objection was received. I am satisfied that no party has been prejudiced by the submission of the corrected plan and I have considered the appeal on the basis of that plan.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

[site address] is a detached bungalow set into a very steep slope, whilst the ground falls away to the rear of the property, the front elevation appears as a modest bungalow. Surrounding properties vary in style and design, creating an eclectic mix of development which has evolved over time and provides an interesting and diverse residential character.

The extension to the front porch would reflect those in the area and its design would sit comfortably within the front elevation of the host dwelling. Similarly, the rooflights on the front roof slope would nestle into the property and would be consistent with the design of rooflights within [site address] . Whilst the extensions to the rear would be more substantial in size, the significant change in land levels would allow the ground floor and lower ground floor extensions to sit within the slope of the site, and the slight set in on either side would ensure that the extensions would not overwhelm the rear elevation of the property. The loft dormer would also be set in to either side, and whilst it would extend across more of the roof slope than set out in the [name], its fenestration and use of glazing would create an interesting addition that would not appear too bulky or dominant.

I find that the proposal would sit comfortably withing the built form of the host dwelling and would respect the character of the area. It would comply with Policies SP4.1 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018), which collectively seek to ensure high quality design which respects the massing and appearance of the surrounding area. Whilst the proposal would not strictly comply with Section 4.21 of the [name] in respect of the width of the loft extension, I consider that this conflict with the guidance would be minimal and would not justify a reason for refusal when the scheme is in accordance with the Croydon Local Plan.

Due to the topography of the area, separation distances between properties, and existing boundary screening, I am satisfied that the proposal would not result in a detrimental increase in overlooking such to be harmful to neighbouring occupiers.

The proposal would comply with the development plan when taken as a whole. For the reasons above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal is allowed.