Appeal 3353295

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the front boundary brick wall with 2 metal electric vehicular and pedestrian access gates and additional vehicular access at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, ref. DC/24/02198/FULL6, subject to the development hereby permitted being carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: PP-13135196v1; 1018/509; and 1018/510A.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

For the purposes of this decision, and in the interest of preciseness, I have used the description from the decision notice and appeal form.

From the appeal documentation and my site visit I note that the proposed development has already partly been carried out. I have determined the appeal on this basis.

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

The appeal site forms a single storey detached dwelling set back from the highway. The appeal site is located within the [site address] Area of Special Appeal Planning Officer APP/G5180/D/24/3353295 [name] (ASRC) which the Council describes as having an open feel, predicated by low boundaries. This section of the ASRC exhibits a range of boundary treatments with walls and fences adjoining the highway being relatively low level affording the street scene an attractive wide and capacious character. Prior to the implementation of the proposed works, the boundary comprised a low brick wall contributing to the openness of the street scene.

The proposed development forms a red brick wall currently in situ, with gates yet to be installed. The proposal represents a modest increase in height of the existing boundary treatment, with a maximum height of approximately one metre, thus maintaining a relatively low profile. As such, the proposal appears unobtrusive within the street scene, preserving the existing open views along the highway and spacious character of the public realm. Moreover, its limited height appears commensurate with the surrounding boundary treatments. The use of red brick walls and black metal gates reflects those materials observed within the neighbouring built environment, further facilitating the proposal’s assimilation with the character of the area and this section of the ASRC.

Accordingly, the proposal would be acceptable with regards to its effect on the character and appearance of the area, complying with the relevant provisions of Policies 37 and 44 of the London Borough of Bromley Local Plan (2019), which when read together require development to complement the scale, proportion, form, layout, and materials of the area, and respect the qualities of Areas of Special Residential Character.

With the development having already been commenced, the standard time limit condition would be unnecessary. However, a condition to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans would be necessary to provide certainty. Specifications of external materials are included within the submitted plans and therefore a separate materials condition is not required.

For the reasons given above, the proposed development would accord with the development plan when read as a whole and there is nothing sufficiently compelling to lead me to find otherwise. I therefore recommend that the appeal should be allowed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed.