Appeal 3287319

The appeal is allowed. Planning permission is granted for two storey rear, part single storey side extension, extension and alterations to existing garage for use as office for working from home at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 76523/APP/2021/3458 dated 12 September 2021 subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06 & 07.

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 main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the [site address] Green Conservation Area (the Conservation Area).

The proposal relates to a detached residential dwelling which sits within a residential cul-de-sac. The significance of this part of the Conservation Area is characterised by the form and scale of its buildings along with open space at the Closes to the south of the site.

Whilst well sized, and generally incorporating well sized gardens, the design and age of the dwellings within the street are mixed meaning that there is no established rhythm to the street-scene. Within this context, the appeal property makes a neutral contribution to the character and appearance of the area.

Whilst the rear extension would cover the unremarkable rear elevation at ground floor level, it would be of only modest depth, set in at first floor level and its two projecting hipped roofs would be set well down from the main ridgeline on the dwelling. Given this design, the extension would not be of excessive scale, size, bulk or depth and it would remain subordinate to the host dwelling.

Further, the window proposed to the converted and extended garage would be set well back from the street given the set back position of the garage. It would have very limited visibility to anyone other than the residents at the dwelling as a result of the robust front gates and boundary treatment of good height.

In any event, the window proposed would be of similar design to the windows on the host dwelling and would not appear out of place or as an unexpected feature in any glimpsed views.

The proposals would therefore have a neutral impact on the appearance of the dwelling and as such would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposal would therefore accord with policies BE1 and HE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 [name] (2012), policies DMHB 1, DMHB 4, DMHB 11, DMHB 12 and DMHD 1 of the Local Plan Part 2 Development Management Policies (2020) and Policy HC1 of the London Plan (2021).

Amongst other things these policies seek well designed development which avoids harm to the historic environment while harmonising with the local environment.

The Council have not raised any concern in relation to other matters including those with regard to living conditions relating to matters of outlook. I have no reason to disagree.

Planning permission is granted subject to the standard three-year time limit. It is necessary that the development be carried out in accordance with the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty. A condition requiring matching materials is necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the area. No other conditions are regarded as necessary by the Council.

Taking all relevant matters into account, the proposal accords with the development plan and there is no indication that a decision should be made other than in accordance with it. The appeal is therefore allowed.