Appeal 3339508

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a first floor side extension at [site address] , Wandsworth, London [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 2023/1902, dated 13 May 2023 subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: A118, A101, A102, A103, A104, A105, A106, A107 and A108.

All external materials used in the construction of the development hereby approved shall match the type, texture, tone, colour, size and profile of those used on the existing building and should be retained permanently.

A revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the “Framework”) was published in December 2023, but there are no material changes relevant to the substance of the Appeal.

The main issue is whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the [address] Conservation Area.

The appeal site is located within a pleasant, leafy, residential street mainly comprising detached and semi-detached bay fronted houses, many of which have been altered and extended over time. The subject dwelling is situated on a bend and slope in the road opposite a small cul-de-sac from which it’s western elevation is visible above a high close-boarded timber boundary fence.

The proposed extension would be constructed over an existing flat roof side extension, to the height of the main eaves on the side elevation of the dwelling. It would appear subservient in form and although it would be more visually exposed when viewing from the south west, the fact that the host dwelling sits on lower ground than the adjacent road would render it as fairly inconspicuous in the street scene.

Therefore, whilst the proposal would add bulk and volume to no65, I consider that it would not be unacceptable in the context of the existing building and the significance of the Conservation Area. The scheme would appear as a natural evolution of the property and I consider that the original design intention of the host dwelling would not be lost due to its subordinate form. Reference is made to the design of the gable roof at the same level as the porch of [address], but that would simply be as a result of the natural topography of the area. Admittedly the proposed extension would sit forward of the principal elevation of no67, however on balance, it would not unduly obscure views or reduce the sense of openness of the street; and I consider that this situation would not be easily replicated elsewhere, because of the rather unusual orientation and siting of the dwelling, effectively side on and lower than the adjacent reasonably steeply sloping carriageway.

I therefore consider that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and no harm would result to this designated heritage asset. I find that the proposal complies with Policies LP1, LP2, LP3 and LP5 of the Wandsworth Local Plan 2023 – 2038 (2023) which require development proposals to reflect and demonstrate a number of principles of design-led approach, having regard to their relevance within the context of the scale and nature of the development proposed, ensuring they sustain, preserve and wherever possible enhance the significance, appearance, character, function and setting of any heritage asset, whilst ensuring that the proposal respects and/or complements the form, setting, period and detailing of the host building, being visually subservient to it and protecting the amenity of the existing and future occupiers of neighbouring properties.

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the appeal should succeed.

Other than the standard time limit condition the Council suggest a condition requiring external materials to be used in the construction of the extension to match those of the existing building, and that the development be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. I consider these conditions necessary in the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the area. However two other conditions are recommended to be imposed preventing the provision of additional windows, with the reasons given being to protect the privacy of neighbours and prevent overlooking. Bearing in mind that the Council’s report concludes that there would be no loss of privacy arising from the proposal, and that further openings would in any case look out upon the public realm, I consider that the imposition of such conditions is unnecessary. [planning inspector] INSPECTOR 2