Appeal 6000009

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for single storey side/rear infill extension. Roof extension involving rear dormer window. Addition of cycle parking and refuse and recycling store. At [site address] , [address], Barnet, London [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/1898/HSE, and subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 1064.000, 1064.001, 1064.002, 1064.003, 1064.011, 1064.012, 1064.111A, 1064.101, 1064.102A, 1064.112, and 1064.103A.

The materials to be used in the external surfaces shall match those used in the existing building.

Before the refuse and cycling stores are erected details of such shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

I have used the amended description of development as agreed by the appellant and Council, as it more accurately describes the proposal than the description entered on the application form.

The Council is in the process of reviewing its Local Plan. The review is at an advanced stage; however, its policies will be of limited weight in the context of the main issue of the appeal.

The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal building is part of a semi-detached pair of bungalows at one end of a road that is otherwise fronted by matching pairs of two storey dwellings. Dwellings are set back from the road, behind street trees, which gives the area a spacious character and appearance.

A long flat roofed extension exists to the side of the existing bungalow. This element is prominent to view from the front, given the relationship between the plot and the alignment of the road. Whilst it retains the form of the dwelling’s original roof, the expansive area of flat roof is a harmful feature in such a prominent position, in an area where pitched roofs prevail.

The proposal would see this replaced with a pitched roof that would extend across the area of the existing extension. This would dilute the form of the original dwelling and imbalance the pair of dwellings to a degree, however they are the only bungalows on the road and do not therefore represent a building type or design that characterises the area and needs to be retained in its original form. The proposed roof would cover the existing flat roof, and as a result the character and appearance of the building and the streetscene would be considerably improved.

A large roof extension would be formed at the rear to improve the existing first floor accommodation. This would significantly exceed the guidelines set out in the Council’s design guide1. However, it would not be visible from the road and would only be viewed from the rear of a small number of neighbouring dwellings and those that use the access track to the side. From these perspectives it would be seen in the context of numerous other roof extensions of a similar scale. I accept that these may have been erected under the provisions of the General Permitted Development Order and as a result would not have been subject to the same level of scrutiny as the appeal proposal; however, they cannot be ignored, and provide a context for accepting the proposal.

In summary, the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the area. It would accord with Policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies Development Plan [name] 2012 and Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document September 2012. Together these Policies seek to ensure that development proposals are well designed to preserve or enhance local character.

I have had regard to the conditions suggested by the Council. I have considered these against the tests in the National Planning Policy Framework and the advice in the Planning Practice Guidance. I have imposed a condition to specify the approved plans to give certainty, and conditions to ensure that the proposal does not harm the character or appearance of the area. I have amended the condition proposed by the Council relating to the refuse and cycling storage, as there is nothing before me to suggest that the provision of these facilities is necessary to make the development acceptable. There is therefore no requirement to provide details of these storage units before the development is occupied. 1 Barnet Borough Council Local Plan Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guidance October 2016

For the reasons above, the appeal should be allowed.