Appeal 3332735

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is whether the proposed development would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Wandsworth Conservation Area.

No.6 is a mid-terrace Victorian house, located on the southern side of [address]. The terraced houses along the road have a consistency in form with projecting bay windows and a boundary wall to the back edge of the pavement. Whilst the materials and height of the front boundaries vary, they are generally low-level brick walls with taller pillars demarking the edge of each property and/or around the entrance gate.

The area forms part of the Wandsworth Conservation Area (WCA). Accordingly, Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, requires that I pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. The significance of the WCA is derived from the grid pattern of the streets and the age and architecture of the properties including the uniformity of the terraces.

The frontage of the appeal property has already been altered with the boundary wall incorporating a bin store, additional pillars and railings, together with a cycle store positioned to the side of the front door infilling the space between the house and the front boundary.

This appeal proposal would create more substantial storage elements which other than the entrance gate would comprise the entirety of the front boundary. The storage units are well designed and the provision of planting to the roof could be a pleasant aesthetic feature. Nonetheless, due to the height, scale and materials, the development would dominate the frontage. It would both be out of keeping with the prevailing boundary form and a prominent feature which would obscure part of the house, including the bay window.

While the appeal property, and some others along the road, have incorporated storage structures they are generally located to the side and are subservient features. The appellant’s objectives and attention to the quality of the appearance of the storage systems are admirable. However, a balance has to be struck between maintaining the appearance of the property and providing adaptions to facilitate modern-day living. Unfortunately, in this instance, I find that the scale of the development and deviation from the traditional boundary form would be incongruous, and visually intrusive to the character of the terrace and the Conservation Area setting.

[name] consider the harm to be less than substantial, any harm should require clear and convincing justification. There would potentially be some benefits including biodiversity enhancements from the planting and increased storage capacity for cycles that would align with wider sustainable travel and climate change objectives. Nonetheless, this is a small-scale proposal for private use and these aspects would not outweigh the harm I have found to the Conservation Area, which in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 205), great weight should be given to its conservation.

Therefore, I find that the proposal would conflict with policies LP1, LP3 and LP5 of the Wandsworth Local Plan 2023-2038, the Housing Supplementary Planning Document and the Wandsworth Conservation Area Appraisal and [name]. Together, and amongst other things, these seek high-quality design, to preserve and where possible enhance the significance of heritage assets, and for alterations to the frontage of properties to respect the form of the host property, be of an appropriate scale and be unobtrusive to the street scene.

I am aware that there is support for the development from several neighbours, and the appellant has referenced other cycle stores of a similar designs that have been implemented elsewhere. I do not doubt that these types of structures offer a potential storage solution, but each case is to be considered on its own merits.

Reference has also been made to permitted development rights which allow for boundary treatments up to 1m. The proposal is for structures above 1m and in excess of the existing boundary structures, and therefore this is a matter to which I have attached limited weight.

For the reasons set out the development would result in harm to the Conservation Area and there are no matters before me which indicate that the proposal should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly, the appeal is to be dismissed.