Appeal 3320445

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a first floor side extension with pitched/hipped roof and first floor part rear extension at [site address] , Eltham, Greenwich [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, 22/3672/HD, dated 3 November 2022, subject to the following

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: A25/03

The materials to be used in the construction 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 appeal dwelling and that of the local area.

The appeal dwelling is a semi-detached house, set well back from the road behind a generous front garden. It is located in an area of similar properties that face onto Eltham Green, many of which, including the appeal dwelling appear to have undergone significant alteration and extension.

The appeal dwelling has been the subject of recent extensions including a hip to gable loft conversion with rear dormer extension. The proposal is for a first floor side extension with hipped roof. The front elevation of this would be set back from the elevation of the original house and the hipped roof, would hip to the flank gable and be set well below the main roof level.

This would follow the design guidance set out in the Royal Borough of [name] and Conversions Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2018) for such side extensions, which advises that they should normally be set back from the front elevation and also step down from the roof of the original house. By doing so, the prosed side extension would appear to be a subordinate addition to the appeal dwelling.

The proposed side extension would infill much of the space above the existing single storey side part of the appeal dwelling, adjacent to the boundary with [address] (No.18). Due to the setting back of the appeal dwelling and its semi-detached pair from the front elevation of the neighbouring pairs of semi-detached houses, and the setting back of the front elevation of the proposed extension from the front elevation of the main house, the proposal would appear to be compatible with its host building and would not result in a terracing effect with No.18

I note that side extensions, including ones with gable ends are evident in the local area, including those houses facing onto Eltham Green. When viewed in this context, the proposed hipped side extension would appear to soften the hard edged effect of the earlier hip to gable alteration to the roof form, and to reflect the established character and appearance of the local area.

The proposed first floor part rear extension would sit above that part of the existing ground floor rear projection that is towards the centre of the main house. It would have a hipped roof form that would adjoin with the existing rear dormer extension, sitting beneath the windows to this existing dormer extension. The other part of the existing ground floor rear projection would be altered to have a flat roof. Due to its rear position toward the centre of the appeal dwelling and its small scale, this part of the proposal would appear to be discreetly positioned and to read as a subordinate addition, including wider views.

For the reasons given above, I do not find that the proposal would result in any significant harm to the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling or that of the local area. As such it would accord with policy DH1 and DH(a) of the Royal Greenwich Local Plan: [name] (2014), policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) and paragraphs 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021). These collectively seek to ensure that development, including extensions, demonstrate high quality design, respect the scale and character of the host building and integrate with the local area.

I have included the standard condition relating to the timing of the implementation of development, and to ensure design quality I have attached a condition requiring compliance with the approved plan and a condition requiring that materials used match those of the existing building.

I have had regard to the Council’s suggested condition relating to the restriction of potential use of the flat roof of the rear projection as a balcony or roof garden and the creation of an opening to access it. However, I find this would not be directly related to the proposal and/or would potentially limit permitted development rights, for which there are no exceptional reasons.

The appeal is allowed.