Appeal 3319331

The appeal is dismissed.

The decision notice refers to policies within the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Draft Local Plan 2037 (Regulation 19 [name], December 2021). I note that the Draft Local Plan is at an advanced stage of adoption. However, there is insufficient information before me to establish whether the policies referred to by the Council are the subject of any unresolved objections. As such, I afford limited weight to the policies in the emerging Local Plan.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host building and the street scene.

The appeal property forms one end of a short terrace of three two-storey houses with a hipped roof and prominent double-storey bays at the front. It includes a recently constructed hip-to-gable extension at the side. The next-door house, [address], feature a porch. Despite these changes the terrace retains much of its original form and the mirrored balance between the end houses has been maintained.

To the side of the appeal property, and set behind the front building line, is a flat-roofed garage. At the other end of the terrace there are a pair of garages which are also recessed behind the building line of the terrace and the neighbouring terrace. The recessed siting of these garages ensures there are gaps between neighbouring terraces. [name] note that some gaps between terraces in the street have been infilled, where they remain, they make a positive contribution to the street scene, a matter to which I attach significant weight.

The proposal would comprise the demolition of the garage and the erection of a predominately two-storey side extension, that would wrap around part of the rear elevation, together with the construction of a single-storey rear extension. The side extension would line through with the front elevation at ground floor level with the upper floor set back slightly. It would extend close to the side boundary of the property leaving limited space between the appeal property and [address]. In addition, due to its siting, size and design the side extension would be an overly prominent and incongruous addition that would unbalance, and therefore harm, the appearance of the terrace.

For these reasons I conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the host building and the street scene. It therefore fails to accord with Policy D4 of the London Plan (2021), Policies CP2 and CP3 of the Planning for the Future of Barking and [name] (2010) and Policy BP11 of the Planning for the Future of Barking and Dagenham Borough Wide Development Policies Development Plan Document (2011). Amongst other matters these policies seek to ensure development recognises local character and promotes good design. There is also conflict with the aims of the [name] and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2012) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) which seeks to ensure development is sympathetic to local character.

The appellant has referred to a planning permission for a two-storey side extension at [address] in Barking1. The approved drawing provided shows a narrow side extension that would be set a significant distance behind the front building line of the host property. This permitted scheme is not directly comparable to the appeal proposal. Similarly, the end or terrace house opposite the appeal site, [address], occupies a corner site with the side extension flanking the road. As each planning application and appeal must be considered on its individual merits, I accord limited weight to these approved schemes or those referred to in [address], [address] and [address].

For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail.