Appeal 3342912

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for hip to gable loft conversion with rear dormer set 200mm down from ridge and matching the depth of the rear wall with paint and rendered finish to match the existing walls of the property at [site address] , Norbury, Croydon, London, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/00366/HSE, and the plans submitted with it.

During my site visit I noted that the development had been completed. As such the appeal has been made retrospectively.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

No [site address] is an end of terrace dwelling located in a predominantly residential area. One side of [address] South is formed of short rows of two-storey terraced dwellings with the other side being formed large two-storey detached dwellings on large plots. The appeal site forms part of one of these short terraces. The terraces are similar in their design, but over time there has been some variation in the colour, roof material and some have been extended with dormer windows to the front and rear and side extension readily apparent in the street scene.

The roof alterations include the construction of a dormer to the rear elevation and the insertion of four roof lights into the front elevation. The dormer is set a little below the ridge level and set in a small amount from its boundary with the neighbouring dwelling. The existing dwelling has been finished in grey render and the dormer window matches this.

The Council’s concerns are that by reason of its combined siting, massing, and use of grey render the development results in a disproportionate, dominant, and visually intrusive form of development that harms the form, proportion and appearance of the dwelling, and the character and appearance of the wider street scene.

In this case, the dormer extension spans most of the width of the roof, although it would be set in from one side. It is set down from the ridge height which aids in it appearing subservient to the host dwelling. Whilst the development is visible from the surrounding area, it appears in the context of similar extensions on [address] South and on [address] to its rear and as such does not appear as an alien feature in the street scene.

I have had regard to the Council’s concerns regarding the use of grey render, which is not a colour used in the area. There is a mix of colours in the area, with the neighbouring properties being brown, cream render on the dwelling opposite and creams and peaches elsewhere. During my site visit I also noted that some nearby properties had grey windows. Therefore, there is a wide colour palette in the area, and whilst grey render is not used there are elements of grey in nearby buildings. The use of grey, would not therefore appear so at odds with the prevailing colour palette to harm the character and appearance of the area.

In conclusion, I find that the proposed development would not be harmful to the character or appearance of the host building or wider area and it would not conflict with Policies SP4.1, DM10.1 and DM10.7 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and Policies D3, D4 and D5 of the London Plan (2021). Together these seek to ensure that, amongst other things, developments are subservient to host buildings and respects the development pattern, layout and siting.

No conditions have been requested by the Council. The development has been completed and I see no reason to attach any further conditions.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.