Appeal 3317628

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey side and rear extension with x4 rooflights and concealed box gutter, removal of existing external staircase and extension of the rear terrace on first floor level. at [site address] , [name], Merton, London, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/P3312, dated 6 November 2022, 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 materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be those specified on the application form unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans, drawings: 92HR-PL-0B, 0A, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 09 (dated 21.09.2022), 92HR-GF-01/[name], GF-[name] and 92HR-FS-00.

The Council have found that the proposal would not cause harm to the architectural integrity of the host property, the terrace of which it is part or the character or appearance of the area. From what I have seen and read I would not disagree.

I therefore consider the main issue to be the effect of the proposed side extension on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] in terms of its potential to appear visually dominant and result in a loss of light to the rooms served by the ground floor side and rear windows.

The appeal property, [site address] , is a mid-terrace two-storey dwelling.

The appellant proposes a single storey side and rear extension, following the removal of existing external staircase, a smaller rear extension and existing roof terrace over.

The proposed side addition would be built up to the boundary to number [address]. The current boundary being a high close boarded fence. The proposed mono-pitched roof would slope up and away from boundary line, abutting the flank wall of the existing two-storey rear outshot just above first floor level.

While having regard to the current boundary treatment, location and height of existing two-storey extension and considering the location of the side extension, its height and three-dimensional form, I am not persuaded on the limited evidence submitted that the proposed side extension would result in an unreasonable increased sense of enclosure toward the side return area of [address]. Further, it would not, in my judgement, be visually dominant or lead to a significant loss of light when viewed from the ground floor side and rear windows.

I therefore conclude in respect of the main issue that the proposed extension would not, as suggested by the Council, cause significant harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] in terms of appearing visually dominant or resulting in a loss of light. The development would therefore accord with the objectives of [name] D2 and [name] and Policies Plan and Policy Maps (Part of Merton’s Local Plan) (Adopted 09 July2014) as, along with other things, it seeks to protect residential living conditions.

I have received a request to condition a requirement for Swift bricks or boxes to be built into the new construction, if I am minded to allow the appeal. However, given the single storey nature and location of the proposed addition I do not consider such a condition would be appropriate in this case. Nevertheless, by reason of this appeal the appellant will now be aware of the submission made to the Council in this respect.

The conditions follow from those suggested by the Council. To ensure a high-quality development, I shall include a condition about the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building.

In the interests of certainty, I shall impose a condition requiring the development to be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans.

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