Appeal 3343362

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a bicycle store with integrated planters at the front of [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2024/0171, and the plans submitted with it.

The development described above is in place and therefore this appeal relates to an application for retrospective planning permission.

The main issue is the effect of the appeal scheme on the character and appearance of the host building and the street scene.

The appeal property forms part of a 3-storey terrace of mid to late 20th century townhouses of simple unadorned design. It is situated in a street comprising houses of different ages and design that are set a similar distance from the street behind small front gardens. The combined effect of the vegetation within these front gardens and the street trees gives the street a pleasant appearance. The appeal site is close to the [address] Conservation Area but does not form part of the Conservation Area’s setting.

The houses to either side of the appeal property have low front boundary walls behind the majority of which there are established hedges. The low wall at the front of the appeal property has been removed and in its place a storage structure has been erected. This provides covered and secure space for the storage of cycles in a convenient location. This therefore accords with the aims of development plan policies that seek to encourage cycling, a matter to which I attach significant weight.

Whilst the cycle storage structure is significantly taller than the wall it replaced, it is not inordinately tall for a front boundary structure and it is lower than some nearby front boundary hedges. It is clad in timber, to mimic the appearance of a fence, and includes a shallow planter on top which provides scope to soften the structure’s appearance. It uses good quality materials and is not out of keeping with the scale and appearance of the host property or the terrace of which it forms parts. In respect of the wider street scene, it is a relatively inconsequential element.

For the reasons set out above I am satisfied that the appeal scheme does not have an unacceptable effect on the on the character and appearance of the host building, the street scene or the setting of the nearby Conservation Area. As such, it accords with Policies LP1 and LP3 of the Hackney Local Plan LP33 (2020) and London Plan (2021) policies D3, D4 and HC1 which, amongst other matters, aim to ensure that development is well-designed and responds to local context. The appeal scheme is also in line with the overall aims of the Council’s Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2009), which include encouraging cycling.

As the development is already in place there is no need for the standard time limit condition, for development to be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings or for details of materials to be approved. As such no planning conditions are necessary in this instance.

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