Appeal 3369434

The appeal is dismissed.

In addition to the description of the proposed development provided on the application form, the Council’s description on its decision notice also refers to the proposed hipped roof extension and the proposed relocation of the side entrance to the front of the appeal dwelling.

The main issues in this case are the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; and its effect on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers of Number [address], with regards to outlook and sunlight and daylight.

The appeal property is an end of terrace dwelling located on the north side of [address]. It is located in a residential area, within the [name], which is a non-designated heritage asset, where there is a predominance of short two-storey terraces of brick, tile and render construction and where dwellings set back from the road behind short gardens, green space and/or parking areas.

During my site visit, I observed there to be a strong sense of rhythm and symmetry afforded by short terraces of dwellings that appear similar in design and materials and which are set within formally laid out streets. Further, in addition to the attractive sense of uniformity derived from this, I also noted during my site visit that the presence of green spaces, trees, hedgerows and gaps between rows of dwellings provides for a pleasant sense of greenery and spaciousness.

The appeal dwelling is located at the end of a terrace which is set back from [address] behind an area of green space close to where the street turns a corner. This results in a relationship with Number [address] whereby the appeal property is set at a right angle to it. [name] 8, also an end of terrace dwelling, has been extended to the side, it retains a small side garden area. The appeal dwelling also has a small side garden area and together, these two areas of garden combine to contribute to the area’s sense of greenery and spaciousness

The proposed development would result in the appeal dwelling being extended to the front and side. The proposed side element would extend to the side boundary at two storey height, filling the small side garden area. I find that this would result in the appeal dwelling appearing cramped on its plot.

The harm arising from the above would be exacerbated as a result of the proposed development severely eroding what is already a relatively small, but important gap between the two terraces within which Nos 8 and [site address] are located. This would result in the two terraces appearing to be built extremely close to one another when seen from various locations, thus severely eroding this important gap. I find that this would be at odds with the character of this part of the [name], where gaps between terraces comprise an important feature; and that it would be to the detriment of the area’s green and spacious character.

In addition to the above, the proposed development, with its forwards-projecting extension, which would extend across the full width of the existing dwelling and the proposed side extension, would draw attention to itself as an overly bulky addition that would overwhelm, rather than appear subservient to, the host dwelling.

Taking the above into account, I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Policies D4 and HC1 of the London Plan (2021); to Policies SP2, SP6, DMD1, DMD4 and DMD5 of the Barking and Dagenham Local Plan (2024) (Local Plan); and to the Council’s Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2012) (SPD), which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character.

The proposed development would extend to within very close proximity of No 8. As a direct result of the height, scale and very close proximity of the proposed extension, I find it inevitable that it would appear to loom above No 8’s side garden to an overbearing degree, to the harm of the outlook of the occupiers of that property.

Further to the above, the proposed development would be located to the south-west of No 8. This, combined with the proposal’s height, scale and very close proximity to No 8, it would inevitably result in some loss of sunlight and daylight to that property.

Taking account of the above, I find that the proposed development would harm the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers of Number [address], with regards to outlook and sunlight and daylight, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to London Plan Policy D4; to Local Plan Policies SP2, DMD1 and DMD5; and to the Council’s Residential Extensions and [name], which together amongst other things, seek to protect residential amenity. Whilst the degree of harm in this regard is not something which on its own would warrant dismissal of this appeal, it is a matter which, when combined with the earlier harm identified, adds weight to the conclusion below.

For the reasons given above, the appeal does not succeed.