Appeal 3306875

The Council's Decision Notice and [name] highlight a number of discrepancies in the submitted drawings that were refused permission. Amended drawings were submitted with the lodging of the appeal which have corrected the errors in the original drawings and do not materially alter the intended development; despite the errors in the original drawings it is apparent what the scheme intended.

I am thus satisfied that the revised drawings are not prejudicial to the interests of the Council or third parties and so have determined the appeal on the basis of the revised drawings.

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of garage and conservatory; erection of part single part two-storey rear extension, two-storey side extension and single storey front extension including alteration to porch at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application ref 22/01724/HSE, dated 14 August 2022, subject to the following conditions:

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

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 approved shall only be used together with and ancillary to the use of the existing property as a single dwelling and shall www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate not be used, let out, sold or otherwise disposed of as a separate self-contained dwelling or business.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: site location plan, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5b, D6b, D7b & D8b.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

The appeal property is a semi-detached house within a residential area. I saw at my site visit that many houses have been altered and extended, including to the side. The appellant has drawn my attention to a number of these changes with reference to side, front, rear and roof extensions having been allowed by the Council over the years. These extensions have evidently changed the appearance of the area from the original design and layout of houses, including reducing gaps between houses. But the general pleasant suburban character remains as, in general, extensions match their host property in design and materials and remain proportionate to the house.

The proposed two storey side extension would be set back from the front elevation, with a roof form that reflects the host property and has a lowered ridgeline. The eaves line would continue on the side extension, and the position and proportions of windows would also reflect the main house. These design matters mean the extension would appear subordinate to the property and be an appropriate addition to the house, and the wider area. An acceptable degree of spaciousness would remain around the house, so reflecting the character of the area.

The degree of projection for the extension to the rear would not impose on the area, due to the siting of the house and relationship to adjoining properties. Extensions at depth, and to the rear and side of buildings, are seen throughout the locality, as noted earlier. The degree of projection would not impose to neighbouring houses.

The proposed works would therefore be a suitable change to the house that would fit comfortably within the context of the residential area. Policies DM10 and SP4 of the Croydon Local Plan 2018 seek to ensure a high-quality built environment and that new development is of a high standard of design appropriate to the local character of an area. Policy D3 of the London Plan 2021 seeks a design-led approach for new development. The proposals satisfy these policy objectives and the appeal is therefore allowed.

The Council have suggested a number of conditions in the event of the appeal being allowed. I have attached a condition requiring matching materials, to ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development, and a condition specifying the approved plans both in the interest of precision.

The proposals show a new door to the front elevation being created, to provide direct access to the additional accommodation, and I agree with the Council that a condition is reasonable and necessary to ensure that the extended property is only used together with the existing single dwelling since the 2 development has been appraised on that basis; a separate use would require a different assessment.