Appeal 3290544

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues in this appeal are: a) The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the existing property and on the street scene, and b) The effect of the proposal on surface water flooding.

The appeal property is an end of terrace, two storey residential dwelling, on the south-western side of [address] (A236), within a predominantly residential area, comprising a mix of semi-detached properties and short terraces. The property has previously been extended with a wrap around rear and side single storey extension.

The proposal would seek to add a further 3m extension across the extended width at the rear and build over at first floor at the side under a hipped roof. The proposal would follow the projecting building line of the existing house at the front together with its catslide roof slope.

The combination of the proposed first floor side addition and the rear extension, taken together with the existing extension would result in a very wide and deep property which would be out of scale and proportion with the existing property and adjoining properties. It would appear very bulky in form and an overdevelopment of its site.

Despite some alterations and the existing single storey side extension, the existing terrace retains a visual unity and symmetry with a central gable and flanked by the cat slide roofs at either end. This symmetry would be harmed with the proposed side extension, which would be particularly apparent at roof level with the extended cat slide roof. This would be visually intrusive in and therefore harmful to the street scene.

I therefore conclude that the proposed extensions would materially harm the character and appearance of the existing property and the terrace within which it is situated as well as the street scene. This would conflict with policies SP4 and DM10 of The Croydon Local Plan (2018), the Suburban Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2019 and policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) as well as Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, all of which amongst other things seek a high quality of design which respects the local context.

The proposed development would extend the footprint of the residential dwelling, with the proposed single storey residential extension, but this would be built over existing hard landscaping. However, I understand that this area of [address] is identified as being at risk of surface water flooding.

Policies SP6.4 and DM25 of The Croydon Local Plan (2018) are clear that all development should address this issue and no information has been provided. The Appellant has suggested that the matter could be addressed by condition, but I cannot be satisfied, with no further information before me, that the issue of surface water flooding would be capable of being satisfactorily mitigated. I cannot therefore be satisfied that there would not be harm from an increased risk of surface water flooding, which would be contrary to Policies SP6.4 and DM25 of The Croydon Local Plan (2018).

For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.