Appeal 3331050

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host building and whether it preserves or enhances the character or appearance of the Battersea Park Conservation Area.

The appeal property is a 2-storey terraced house. It forms one end of a group of 3 late-Victorian houses of similar appearance featuring 2-storey bay windows at the front and 2-storey outriggers to the rear. The central property, [address], features a full-width dormer on the rear roof slope but other than that the group retains its original roof form. The appeal property is abutted by 1, 2, 3 and [address], a more substantial terrace with raised ground floors and mansard roof additions. I note that planning permission1 was granted in 2012 for a scheme including the installation of a dormer within the rear roof slope of the appeal property.

The property is situated within the Battersea Park Conservation Area (CA) which is centred on the Park and the grand mansion blocks facing it. The south-west portion of the CA, which includes [address], is characterised by a range of types and scales of Victorian terraced housing. Nos. 5, 6 and [address] form a good example of their type and positively contribute to the character and appearance of the CA. 1 Application reference 2012/2663

The proposal would comprise the erection of a full-width front and rear dormer extension, in effect adding a box-like addition to the entirety of the main part of the house. The front and rear elevations would be clad in slate and a balcony would be formed above part of the outrigger at the rear accessed via glazed doors. The roof addition would extend above current ridge level and feature a flat roof.

I note that the roof addition would not be particularly evident in views looking west along the street due to the height of the neighbouring terrace and would be lower than this terrace. I also recognise that [address] includes a range of types and sizes of housing. However, in the context of the terrace of which the appeal property forms part, the proposal would be an overly prominent and incongruous element that would severely disrupt the roof scape of the terrace and result in substantial harm to, and a failure to preserve, the character and appearance of the CA.

For these reasons the proposal fails to accord with Policies LP1 and LP3 of the Wandsworth Local Plan 2023-2038 (LP), which seek to ensure that developments provide high-quality design that contributes positively to local character and preserves the significance, appearance and character of heritage assets. There is also conflict with Policy HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and LP Policy LP5, which require development proposals affecting heritage assets, and their settings, to conserve their significance.

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