Appeal 3295390

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a Two storey rear extension. Reconfiguration out of the southern flank wall. New crowned roof to rear and creation of loft floor, at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/5896/HSE, dated 29 October 2021, and subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this permission.

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 development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan dated 06.11.21; 20201-DC-00- DR-A-00201-S2 Rev P02; 20201-DC-RF-DR-A-00100-S2 Rev P02; 20201- DC-02-DR-A-00100-S2 Rev P02; 20201-DC-00-DR-A-00300-S2 Rev P02; 20201-DC-00-DR-A-00100-S2 Rev P03; 20201-DC-01-DR-A-00100-S2 Rev P03; :20201-DC-00-DR-A-00200-S2 Rev P03.

The description of development in the banner heading above has been taken from the planning application form. However, in [name] of the appeal form it is stated that the description of development has not changed but, nevertheless, a different wording has been entered. Neither of the main parties has provided written confirmation that a revised description of development has been agreed. Accordingly, I have used the one given on the application form.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area, with particular regard to the proposed rear extension and roof extension.

The application site is a two-storey semi-detached dwelling house located on [address], Edgware. The surrounding area is residential in nature. The area is characterised by similar two storey detached and semi-detached properties, many of which have undergone extension works to a variable extent. Correspondingly, the site history indicates that the application site was also historically extended.

In relation to the proposed two storey rear extension and in particular the width and roof design, having viewed the proposals and conducted a site visit, it would not appear incongruous because of the extent to which other similar renovations have occurred at nearby properties. Instead, the proposed rear extension would reflect the local characteristics of the area, in relation to appearance, scale, mass, height and pattern of the surrounding buildings observed during my site visit. The proposed development would also reflect the existing building lines and rhythm of the street in accordance with the Residential Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2016). Specifically, it is noted that the proposed rear extension would match the dimensions of the neighbouring property and not protrude any further, which will create visual symmetry from the rear-view perspective.

Equally, while the works associated with the proposed development are extensive, they would not dominate the rear of the property due to its current size, which has already undergone extension works. As the proposed works cannot be taken in isolation without the supporting bulk of existing extension works, I do not consider that they will dominate the rear aspect of the property in comparison with the existing dimensions of the application site.

In relation to the side extension, works have been proposed which would affect the form of the roof, with the creation of a loft area. These works would align the roof of the side extension with the main ridge, without any set down. Significantly, I note that the roof of the adjoining property also does not have a set down from the main ridge.

The works associated to the roof from the side extension are inconsistent with the technical requirements set out in Barnet's Residential Design Guidance SPD (2016). However, the lack of a set down from the roof does not contradict the local characteristics of the area, in relation to the height and pattern of the surrounding buildings, specifically those which are adjacent to the property. The proposed side extension would therefore also not be dominant or constitute a bulky addition once assessed against the context of the existing local characteristics.

Accordingly, I find that there would be no detrimental effect upon the character and appearance of the host property or surrounding area. The proposal therefore accords with Policy DM01 of Barnet's Local Plan (Development Management Policies) Development Plan Document (2012) and Policy CS5 of Barnet's Local Plan ([name]) (2012). Amongst other aspects, these ensure that that the character and amenity of Barnet is protected to create high quality places.

For the above reasons, the appeal is allowed subject to conditions that are necessary in the interests of certainty and safeguarding the character and appearance of the area.