Appeal 3306556

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for loft conversion at [site address] , Essex, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref. EPF/1295/22, dated 31 May 2022, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location/[name] 1-RR-01; [name] 1-RR-04; and [name] 1-RR-05.

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 streetscene and surrounding area.

The appeal property is a semi-detached house that is in a reasonably prominent position near a road junction, and next to an open driveway and gardens of dwellings fronting [address]. The area is characterised by mostly two-storey houses, with the prevailing roof form being hipped. However, within the wider streetscene and surrounding area there are gabled roofs, including examples where one half of a semi-detached pair has a gable side and the other remains hipped. The appellant has drawn attention to nearby examples of this, including some in equally or more prominent positions. At the appeal site visit it was apparent that loft conversions with gable sides are now part of the local streetscene.

Although the appeal property and the attached building both have hipped roofs, they differ in design as result of extensions. This includes a slightly awkward roof design to the existing side extension to the appeal property, with linked hipped roofs of varying height. This extension and its roof are visible in the streetscene in views across the neighbouring driveway.

In this context, the proposal would simplify the existing roof form, with the staggered ridge height and setback position of the lower gable ensuring a degree of subservience to the main dwelling. The rear dormer window would be large and would add to the scale of the development, but its impact on the streetscene of [address] would be limited as a result of its position. Views of the proposal from [address] would be distant, and although the property is elevated above its rear garden, the trees in the parkland beyond would filter views from that direction. Considered cumulatively, the additions would not appear excessive in scale and bulk relative to the host building, nor unduly dominant on the streetscene.

I therefore conclude that the proposal would be acceptable in its impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene and surrounding area, and would comply with Policy DBE10 of the Epping Forest District Local Plan 1998 and Alterations 2006, which requires residential extensions to complement and, where appropriate, enhance the appearance of the streetscene and existing building in matters including scale, form, detail, elevations, materials, roof treatment, and separation from any neighbouring buildings. Given its stage in the examination process I have also had regard to Policy DM 9 of the Epping Forest District Local Plan [name] 2017 and find no conflict with its design standards.

A representation was submitted raising concern about potential encroachment of the neighbouring driveway during the construction of the extension. However, this would be a civil matter between the parties and is beyond the scope of this appeal.

In addition to the standard time limit, I have attached a condition specifying the approved drawings as this provides certainty. It is also appropriate to control materials to match the existing dwelling, in order to safeguard the character and appearance of the development and the area.

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