Appeal 3324677

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of: Part single, part two storey side and rear extension including associated alterations to roof to enlarge existing loft, at No. [site address] in accordance with application ref. 23/1209/HSE, dated 19 March 2023, subject to the following conditions:

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 plans: existing elevations dated 27 February 2023; existing ground and first floor plan view dated 27 February 2023; [name], Rear and left elevation dated 27 February 2023; Proposed ground & [name] plan views dated 27 February 2023.

No development shall commence until details/samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extensions hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details/samples.

The decision turns on the likely effect of the proposed extensions on the appearance of the house at No. [address] scene in this part of [address].

The appeal dwelling, No. [site address] , is a 2 storey semi-detached house with prominent front bay windows on the ground and first floors and with tall pitched roof gable above. That frontage design is shared by that of the attached house, No. [address]. The plot on which No. 4 stands is shown to be 8.8m wide. No. 4 has an ill-matching 3m wide or so flat roofed single garage built onto the other side of the house. The house next door to the south, No. 2, is one of a similar pair of semi-detached houses, but with hipped roof gables above the 2 storey bay windows. The side gable wall to No. 2 is built almost on the boundary with No. 4.

The Appellant, [name], wishes to extend his home at No. 4 by replacing the garage with a 2 storey side extension 3.2m wide at ground floor level, narrowing to 2.2m wide on the first floor. The ridge of the pitched roof above the new extension would be 0.5m below that of the main part of the house. The ground floor part of the extension would extend 3m beyond the rear wall of the house to a total depth of 12.8m.

LB Barnet’s Local Development Framework Development Management Policies Document at Policy DM01 seeks to protect Barnet’s character and residential amenity. All development is expected to respect existing character. Regard is to be had to a number considerations when assessing proposed developments, including: • Scale, mass and height • Design and materials • Relationship with adjoining properties and the street scene.

The Council said the application information had been inaccurate and contradictory. Nevertheless, they concluded on the basis of information submitted the proposed extensions would not be acceptable. They were concerned the size of the extensions, design and siting would detract from the character and appearance of the host property. The works would also cause a detrimental terracing effect, harmful to the character of the area.

I note that planning permission ref: 22/0252/HSE for a single storey side and rear extension following demolition of the existing garage and conservatory at No. 4 was issued on 12 April 2022. It appears the only significant difference in the likely appearance of the dwelling as seen from the fronting road between the approved extension project and that before me is the upper floor element of the current scheme. In that regard, I can understand the Council’s concern about what they consider to be the possible deleterious effect of “terracing” on the street scene, especially where much of the immediate locality is characterised by semi-detached houses with gaps between walls at first floor level. However, in this instance, the gap at first floor level between No. 4 and No. [address] is less than typically seen between other semi-detached houses nearby as the gable wall of No. 2 facing to No. 4 was built alongside shared the boundary. In other instances, a ground floor side extension to each neighbouring house extends the gap at first floor level.

As the Appellant pointed out, his 2 storey side extension design broadly complies with set standards in that the upper floor extension’s roof ridge would be set 0.5m below that of the main house and the side wall facing to No. 2 would be set in by 1m from the 3.2m wide ground floor extension. I consider that the result would be that the house at No. 4 would look acceptably attractive, any closing in between No. 4 and No. 2 caused by the position of the existing gable wall to No. 2, not a situation that should disqualify an otherwise compliant project at No. 4.

I conclude that the Part single, part two storey side and rear extension including associated alterations to roof to enlarge existing loft at No. [site address] at would not be in material conflict with LB Barnet’s Local Development Framework Development Management Policies Document at Policy DM01 which seeks to ensure a high standard of development. A conditional planning permission is granted.

For the reasons given above, the appeal succeeds. A condition limiting the duration of the permission is applied, (s.91 of the Act), as is a condition relating to the submitted plans defining the project and a condition requiring the submission of details of external finishes to ensure a match with the main house.