Appeal 3292858

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of single storey detached outbuilding to rear for ancillary uses, to involve demolition of existing patio and gazebo at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P1627.21 dated 17 August 2021, and the plans submitted with it, 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: 18/464/001 [name]; 18/464/002 and 18/464/003 [name].

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be in accordance with the details provided in the application form.

The Council changed the description of development from that stated on the application form in the interests of clarity. I consider that the amended description accurately describes the appeal scheme and accordingly I have adopted the amended description in the heading above.

The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of Gidea Park Conservation Area.

The site is within the Gidea Park Conservation Area. In accordance with the statutory duty imposed by section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990; I am required to have special regard to the effect of the proposed development on the character or appearance of the area.

The Conservation Area is characterised by predominantly individually designed early 20th century properties influenced by the arts and crafts movement within mature gardens. Properties are largely detached, the variety of designs and the mature planting in streets, gardens and open spaces contributes to the character and appearance of the area. The mature gardens, trees and boundary hedges form an integral part of the character of the Gidea Park Conservation Area.

The existing gazebo and raised patio have a neutral effect on the conservation area, the proposed development would remove the existing structure and raised patio to allow the proposed development to be erected. Whilst larger than the existing structure the proposed development would be screened to a degree by the existing mature hedgerow. The proposed development would not be visible in the streetscene.

I observed during my site visit domestic paraphernalia within the rear gardens of surrounding properties, including outbuildings within the rear garden of the appeal site closer to the adjacent water feature than the proposed development which can clearly be observed by occupiers of surrounding properties.

The Council raise concern with regard to the close relationship between the proposed development and the main house. This relationship is not dissimilar to the existing relationship between the property and the existing gazebo and raised patio.

Whilst a large contemporary addition to the property, accessing the outbuilding from a lower level will assist in providing a visual separation from the main house. The proposed development is subservient to the main house and appeal site itself and due to existing structures within the rear garden I do not agree with the Council that the proposed development would appear incongruous and invasive to the garden character contributing to a sprawling effect.

I find that the proposed development would have a neutral effect on the conservation area similar to the existing gazebo and raised patio.

I conclude that the development would not harm the character and appearance of the Gidea Park Conservation Area. There is no conflict with Policies 26 and 28 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 (2021) which amongst other things seek to reflect and complement local distinctiveness, achieve good design appropriate to the local context which conserve and enhance Conservation Areas.

For the above reasons I conclude that this appeal should be allowed.

I have attached the standard time limit condition and a plans condition as this provides certainty. I have also added a condition concerning materials to ensure a satisfactory appearance. Whilst the Council suggested further details relating to materials, the application form is clear; given the location and design of the proposed development I do not consider further details are necessary.

The Council have suggested a condition relating to the removal of permitted development rights which requires the development to be used only for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house. The proposed development seeks consent for an outbuilding ancillary to the dwelling house. I have not been provided with substantive evidence to demonstrate why an ancillary outbuilding should not be permitted in this location or why permitted development rights should be restricted.