Appeal 3276743

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a double storey rear and part ground floor front extension with modified pitched roof to side at [site address] , Broxbourne [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 07/21/0095/HF, dated 28 January 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: KD/FIRST/PP/24/20/S-206.1; KD/FIRST/PP/24/20/S-206.2; KD/FIRST/PP/24/20/S-206.3; KD/FIRST/PP/24/20/S-206.4 [name]/FIRST/PP/24/20/S-206.5.

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.

It is considered that the main issues are the effects of the proposed development on (a) the character and appearance of the host property and the streetscene and (b) the adequacy of the off-street parking provision.

The appeal property is a 2-storey semi-detached dwelling, with an existing 2- storey side addition, which is located within an area comprising a mix of uses and building styles and designs. Along the south side of [address] there is a mix of dwelling types but they generally have pitched roof forms. The commercial properties fronting the opposite side of the road have flat roofs.

The Council has already confirmed, by the issuing of a Certificate of Lawful Development (Ref 07/20/0661/LDP), that alterations could be undertaken to the property as permitted development, including a hipped to gable roof extension. In the assessment of this appeal significant weight is given to the ability to undertake these alterations to the property. It is noted that some of the alterations which could occur would already conflict with the Council’s Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG), including discouraging hip to gable extensions.

The proposed development includes a 2-storey rear extension incorporating an existing single storey addition, a single storey front extension and an alteration to the roof of the existing 2-storey side addition to create storage within the roofspace.

By reason of the 2-storey side addition, the symmetry of this pair of semi-detached dwelling has already been disrupted. This imbalance in the appearance of these dwellings would be accentuated by the works which could be undertaken pursuant to the Certificate of Lawful Development, in particular the alteration to the property’s roof form. The proposed front extension and alteration to the roof of the existing 2-storey addition would not cause any further harm to the symmetry of this pair of dwellings and their contribution to the residential streetscene along the south side of [address].

As part of the proposed development crown roofs would be erected above the side addition and the rear extension. There is no specific guidance on crown roofs in the SPG. These crown roofs would be visible from [address] and also [address] above the existing boundary of 3 and [address]. From what was observed during the site visit crown roofs are not a typical roof form for the residential properties.

However, the proposed crown roofs would be modest in scale and there would, from viewpoints along the roads, remain a general impression of these being pitched roof forms. Further, the external appearance of the property already has the potential to be significantly altered pursuant to the Certificate of Lawful Development. Accordingly, the proposed crown roofs would not be so conspicuous so as to cause unacceptable harm by unduly impacting on the character and appearance of the host property and the streetscene. The assimilation of the crown roofs into the appearance of the property and the streetscene would be assisted by the use of matching external materials and this could be secured by a condition.

On this issue it is concluded that the proposed development would not cause unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the host property and the streetscene and, as such, it would not conflict with Policies DCS1 and DCS2 of the Borough of Broxbourne Local Plan (LP). Amongst other matters these policies require a high standard of design and to ensure that the scale, design and external appearance of the extension/alteration to dwellings does not unduly impact upon the parent building and wider setting.

The front garden of the property comprises hardstanding which is used parking purposes. The proposed front extension would not materially encroach into the hard surfaced area and would not project further forward than the existing projecting front gable. The general extent of the hardstanding would remain.

From what was observed, the parking area could accommodate 3 vehicles which would satisfy the standard of 3 spaces sought at [name]. This level of parking could be retained without altering the current access arrangements to [address] or affecting the access for Nos. 3 and 5. For the reasons given, the proposed development would provide adequate off-street parking and, as such, it would not conflict with the parking requirements identified at LP Policy TM5 and [name].

The Council has suggested several conditions in the event this appeal succeeds which have been assessed against the tests in the National Planning Policy Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance. A condition is necessary to secure the erection of the appeal scheme in accordance with the submitted plans. For the reasons given, a condition is necessary to secure the use of matching external materials. Accordingly, it is concluded that this appeal should be allowed.