Appeal 3352272

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for a front ground floor porch extension, side and rear (3m) wrap around ground floor extensions and first floor flat roofed extension over part of ground floor at [site address] , Loughton, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, subject to the following

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

The external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in the materials detailed in the application form.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos MDP.THO/0111, MDP.TH/0122 and MDP.TH/0133.

On 12 December 2024, the Government published a revised National Planning Policy Framework. Having reviewed the changes, I am satisfied that they do not affect the substantive matters of the appeal and that proceeding without further consultation with the main parties would not be prejudicial to their respective cases.

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

The appeal site contains a bungalow that is accessed from [address]. The plot sits significantly behind the building line of other dwellings along the road and its eastern side borders the railway line. [address] is a residential road with a mix of bungalows and two storey dwellings of varying designs.

The existing bungalow has ground floor extensions with flat roofs giving the dwelling a contemporary appearance. The proposal would replicate this design at first floor level resulting in an innovatively designed property that would appear as a modern new dwelling.

Whilst the proposed sloping flat roof is not a design feature of the road, the unique position of the appeal site means that the site is not visible from the highway and the proposal would not be read in the context of other dwellings in the road. In any event, the proposal would not exceed the height of other dwellings on [address] and given the mix of dwellings along the road, it would relate positively to its locality.

Reference is made to the fallback position of the extant certificate of lawfulness1 detailing single storey rear and side extensions and a hip to gable roof extension with dormer. There is a real prospect that this could be erected and as such it is a material consideration in my assessment. Whilst the Council consider that the fallback position would be preferable, the proposal would appear as a comprehensive redesign of the property as opposed to the ad hoc extensions proposed by the fallback position. As a result, despite the proposal having a slightly larger mass at first floor, it would improve the overall appearance of the host dwelling compared to the fallback scheme and would therefore be an improvement when compared to the fallback position.

For the reasons above, the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore be compliant with policy DM9 of the Epping Forest District Council Local Plan 2011- 2033 which requires good design which relates positively to its context.

Reference is made to the proposed first floor bedroom windows in the side elevation and the potential for overlooking [address]. Due to the position of the appeal site adjacent to No 70, the proposed windows would not face the neighbouring property. As a result, any views of the neighbouring property from these windows would be both limited and oblique. This would not unacceptably affect the privacy of [address].

Interested parties allege that the proposal would result in the neighbour’s garden being in shadow all morning. Whilst there may be some potential for a loss of sunlight to the rear garden of No 70, it has not been demonstrated that this impact would be worse than the fallback position.

A significant proportion of the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation (EFSAC) lies within the administrative area of Epping Forest District Council. The effects of the proposal on this designation must be considered in combination with other plans and projects in the area. The Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) concludes that there are two identified pathways of impact whereby development within the district is likely to result in significant effects on the EFSAC. The identified pathways relate to recreational pressures and atmospheric pollution. Given that the proposal is for extensions to an existing dwelling, there would be no net increase in recreational pressures or atmospheric pollution and therefore there would be no adverse effect on the EFSAC. 1 EPF/1312/17

Interested parties refer to the loss of a bungalow and the resultant reduction in housing choice. However, it has not been demonstrated that the loss of a bungalow would be harmful to the area and in any event, the fallback position would also result in the existing bungalow becoming a two storey dwelling.

In addition to the standard time condition, it is necessary for a condition to list the approved plans in the interest of certainty. A condition is also required to control the external finish of the development, to ensure a high quality design.

Transport for London (TfL) suggest a pre commencement condition requiring a design and method statement. TfL consider that the condition is required to ensure that the proposal would not negatively impact London underground transport infrastructure. However, it has not been demonstrated that the proposal would negatively impact transport infrastructure, the London Plan policies referred to do not apply to the district and given that the proposal is set in from the boundary with the railway line, the condition would neither be reasonable nor necessary.

For the reasons given above the appeal is allowed.