Appeal 3374741

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the erection of a hip to gable extension with a dormer extension to main rear roof slope with a smaller dormer on the front main roof at [site address] , London, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2025/2273, subject to the conditions set out in the accompanying Schedule.

The proposal is concerned with various alterations and additions to the dwelling’s roof. For the reasons set out in the officer report, the Council has no objection to the proposed rear dormer or the change from hip to gable. I have no reason to disagree with the Council’s stance on these matters. The Council’s sole concern is with the proposed front dormer.

Accordingly, the main issue is the effect of the front dormer on the character and appearance of the host property and its surroundings.

The appeal property is a sizeable end of terrace dwelling standing on [address]’s junction with [address]. The terrace has a pleasant appearance at the front being well proportioned and displaying gabled features above double height bays. Apart from some rooflights the terrace’s roof profile at the front is unchanged, and the Council regards the proposed installation of a front dormer as objectionable since they consider it would look incongruous and inappropriate.

However, it appears to have arrived at its judgment from a starting point of treating the proposal as a ‘roof extension’, considered to be both prominent and bulky in the street scene. I do not share the Council’s assessment. The proposed dormer, in my view, does not constitute a roof extension in the commonly accepted sense of the term. Far from being bulky, it would be reasonably sized, set down from the main ridge, and complementary in shape, size and proportion to other features in the front elevation, particularly the gables and window below. It is well-designed with a ridged roof, hipped gable and would be finished in matching materials. Although it would be the first of its type in the terrace, I consider it would fit harmoniously and unobtrusively within the street scene.

I therefore conclude that the proposal would sit acceptably in its visual and spatial context without harming the character and appearance of the host property or its surroundings. Accordingly, I find no material conflict with those provisions of policy LP5 of the Wandsworth Local Plan (WLP), a policy directed specifically to residential extensions and alterations, providing that proposals should respect and complement the form and detailing of the host property and that modifications to any elevation fronting a street are of a minor scale and unobtrusive within the street scene.

It is necessary that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, and a condition to this effect is therefore imposed in the interests of certainty.

The Council’s suggested condition in respect of materials is also imposed in the interests of visual amenity.

All other matters raised in the representations have been considered, including the references to the National Planning Policy Framework, and other policies in the WLP. No other matter raised is of such strength or significance as to outweigh the considerations leading me to my conclusions.

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: [name]: A3100; A3101; A3102; A3103; A3104; A3105; A3106; A3107; A3108; A3109; A3110; A3111; A3112; A3113; A3114; A3115; A3116; A3117; A3118; A3119; A3120 & A3121.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing building.