Appeal 3341741

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a ground and first floor side and single storey rear extension at [site address] , [address], Waltham Forest, Chingford [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application reference 240083 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: 01-Existing Floor Plan; 02-Existing Elevation Plan; 03-Proposed Floor Plan; 04-Proposed Elevation Plan; 05-Existing and Proposed Roof Plan; 06-Block Plan; 07-[name]; 09-Existing and Proposed Section.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

The description of development in the planning application form is “double storey side part rear extension”. However, I have taken the description from the Notice of Decision in this case as it more clearly describes the appeal proposal. The appellant’s statement refers to a third party having made the planning application under appeal. However, for the avoidance of doubt I confirm that the planning application form and the Notice of Decision refer to the appellant, [name], as the applicant.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area.

The appeal property is a two-storey terraced residential dwelling situated at the corner of [address] and [address] at the end of a terrace of houses known as Rowden Park Gardens. Although primarily residential, in front of the appeal site is a main road junction on [address] serving large commercial and retail buildings to the rear of residential buildings opposite. On visiting the site, I noted that adjacent to the appeal site, on the other side of [address] is a very prominent building under construction of around four storeys in height. No other information about the building under construction is available to me. At the other end of the group of terraced houses is No. [address]. This property has a similar extension to the appeal proposal.

The appeal proposal would result in an extension set back approximately one metre from the front elevation of the host dwelling and would feature a hipped roof design set down from the roof ridge height of the host dwelling. It would result in a blank single storey elevation abutting [address], with the second storey element set back within the plot.

I have had regard to the prominent building on the opposite corner of [address], the existing brick wall at the appeal site abutting [address], together with the similar end of terrace extension at No.10. Within this context I find the proposed design, size and bulk of the proposal would successfully integrate within the street scene without harm to the character and appearance of the area.

I consider the proposed extension to be of a good design, that would be subservient to the host dwelling and a sympathetic addition in relation to the character of both the host dwelling and the surrounding area.

I note that the extension at No. 10 was determined prior to the current development plan and National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). I find that the principles of good design and consideration of the impact on the character of the host dwelling and the street-scene have not materially changed in relation to the consideration of this proposal.

I conclude that the proposal would make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the area by virtue of its acceptable design and appropriate scale within its context.

Accordingly, I find that the proposal complies with policy 53 of the Waltham Forest Local Plan Part One – Shaping the Borough 2020-2035 (2024), and the Framework, which seek high quality design appropriate to its context.

I have imposed a condition requiring matching materials in the interest of good design. I have imposed a condition specifying the plans in the interests of certainty.

Having taken into account all representations made, for the reasons given above, I conclude that the proposal accords with the development plan when considered as a whole and the Framework. Therefore, the appeal should be allowed subject to conditions.