Appeal 3325391

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following list of approved plans, 2102-S73A_001, 101 and 201.

The development shall not be erected other than in the following materials: slim format brick slips at ground floor level, ebony oil-stained timber cladding to mansard roof, single ply membrane to flat roof sections and PCC aluminium heritage style doors and windows.

The development permitted by this planning permission shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details set out in the flood risk assessment (FRA) prepared by Herrington Consulting Limited received by the council on 7 October 2021, and the mitigation measures detailed within the FRA. The mitigation measures shall be fully implemented prior to occupation.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations in the [name] report, including biodiversity enhancements, by [name] dated 8 June 2021.

I consider the main issue to be the effect of the proposal on the living conditions of the occupiers of number 9 The Island in respect of potential overlooking and loss of privacy.

The appeal property, [site address] is a recently extended and altered detached chalet. It is located between two neighbouring dwellings and faces the Thames. The development approved by the Council has been commenced but not yet fully completed.

The appellant proposes, along with amendments to the layout, relatively minor alterations to the fenestration of the building. The Council found the alterations to have an acceptable relationship with the host dwelling and the prevailing local character. From what I have seen and read I would concur with the Council’s findings in this respect.

The appellant also proposes that, as identified on the application drawings certain of the windows in the flank elevations should be clear glazed and not obscure glazed. The Council’s concerns in respect of this change however related only to the first-floor window overlooking number 9 on the south-east side.

From what I observed on site I concur with the Council’s finding in respect of the windows in the north-west elevation and the ground floor windows in the south-east façade being acceptable.

The first-floor window, overlooking number 9, while serving a landing area is situated above a staircase well with only a very narrow window board that would provide access for cleaning and maintenance only. Accordingly, unlike say a bedroom, living room or even a large landing area there would be no opportunity for people to be able to stand or congregate by the window.

For this reason, and while having regard to the siting/relationship of number 9, a bungalow, to number 10 and the position of the first-floor window and the private garden of number 9, I do not consider that the change in glazing to this window would lead to an unacceptable level of actual or perceived overlooking. It would therefore not result in a significant loss of privacy to the adjoining and future occupiers of number 9 The Island as suggested by the Council.

I therefore conclude in respect of the main issue that the proposed use of clear glazing in the windows in the flank walls of the appeal property would not cause harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of either number 9 or 11 The Island by reason of actual or perceived overlooking resulting in a loss of privacy.

To allow the approved windows to be clear glazed would accord with the objectives of Policy DM2-of the Elmbridge Borough Council-Elmbridge Local Plan Development Management Plan ([name] 2015), The Elmbridge Local

and the National Planning Policy Framework as they relate to, amongst other things, the protection of the living conditions of residential occupiers.

The guidance in the Planning Practice Guidance makes it clear that decision notices for the grant of planning permission under section 73 should also restate the conditions imposed on earlier permissions that continue to have effect.

Accordingly, as suggested by the Council, in addition, to a condition that specifies approved drawings to provide certainty, a condition relating to materials is necessary to assure the quality of development. Furthermore, in the interests of the protection and conservation of biodiversity and to reduce overall and local risk of flooding the development shall be carried out in accordance with the previously submitted the [name] report, including all biodiversity enhancements and the mitigation measures set out in the FRA.

However, as the development has commenced I have omitted the standard time limit condition as this is no longer necessary.

For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should succeed.