Appeal 3294528

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

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

This side of [address] is residential, comprising a row of highly similar properties which, although extended and altered, have retained most of their original features, most notably their simple hipped roof form. This gives this side of the road a consistent appearance and rhythm which continues into [address]. The opposite side of the road is a tree lined boundary with a school, which has a very different character. [site address] is situated on the corner with [address], and as such is in a highly visible location where the rear elevation is also publicly visible.

The proposed works to the roof would considerably alter the roof form and the simplicity of the existing roof would be lost. Although it would not increase in overall height, the scale and resulting proportions of the roof alterations would dominate and be out of character with the host dwelling. In this location, the proposed gabled roof would be prominently visible and would stand out in stark contrast to the consistent hipped roof forms that characterise the dwellings in this area. Consequently, it would be an incongruous addition to the street scene, detrimental to the character of [address].

There are other examples of dormers nearby, in particular [address] which can be seen from within the appeal site, however there are no other examples of dormers on [address]. While gabled roof forms may be common elsewhere, they are not characteristic of this locality and the other roof alterations nearby have not created gable ends in the way proposed here. Furthermore, none are in a similarly visible corner location, so the proposal is therefore not comparable with any other similar alterations locally.

The use of matching materials would help to maintain the character and appearance of the street scene and host dwelling. However, this would not lessen the harm that would be caused by the change in roof form.

Accordingly, the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the host dwelling and area. It would therefore conflict with Policies 6 and 37 of the London Borough of Bromley Local Plan 2019, and Policy D3 of the London Plan 2021 which collectively require development proposals to positively contribute to the existing street scene, and to complement scale, proportion and form of adjacent buildings.

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

I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed.