Appeal 6000100

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the creation of a roof incorporating 2 x rear dormer. Partial front ground floor extension at [site address] , Hendon, Barnet, London [postcode] in accordance with the terms of application Ref 24/3938/HSE, and the plans submitted with it, 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 drawing numbers: 01A Site Location Plan; 03 [name]; 05 Proposed Roof Plan; and 06 [name].

The Council adopted the Barnet Local Plan 2021-2036 (LP) on 4 March 2025. This replaces the previous Local Plan referred to in the Council’s reason for refusal. Both parties have been given an opportunity to comment on the implications of this for the appeal. The Council provided copies of Policies CDH04 and HOU03 of the LP which relate to tall buildings and residential conversions which are not relevant to the appeal proposal.

The main issues in this appeal are: • The effect of the proposal development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area; and • Whether the proposed development would preserve the setting of the [name] listed [address].

The appeal dwelling is single storey with a flat roof. The addition of first floor accommodation within a pitched roof would fundamentally alter the character and appearance of the dwelling and increase its prominence in the street. However the [name] Guidance1 states that proposals should take into account the established form of development along the street and complement the roof form of the surrounding area

Notwithstanding its former use as a garage, it is a dwelling in a street where the overriding character is that of two storey dwellings. The addition of first floor accommodation within a pitched roof would not appear out of character in this context.

Accordingly, no conflict would arise with Policy CDH01 of the LP which requires that developments optimise site capacity and respond sensitively to distinctive local character and design including building form, scale, massing, roof form and height.

[address] is a [name] listed building located adjacent to the appeal site. It was built by [name] in 1934-5 for Haymills Ltd, a leading building firm erecting fine quality houses in [name] during the 1930’s.

Constructed in a Moderne style of architecture, it benefits from a distinguished and unaltered façade, consisting of rendered brick, flat asphalt roof and tall rendered stacks. The building is two storey with a roof-top sunroom and curved corners. It is an unusually large, early and imaginative example of a traditionally planned house from the 1930’s. It derives significance from its historical and architectural interest.

The setting of a listed building includes the surroundings in which it is experienced. To each side of the main house are single storey flat roof projections. These were added to the building later and do not in themselves have special interest. The one closest to the appeal site serves as a garage. This, together with the flat roof to the appeal dwelling, affords views from the street towards the side of the listed building. Given that [address] is largely experienced from the street at the front of the building, I find that the appeal site is within the setting of the listed building.

The side of the listed building is fairly unremarkable although the flat roof and tall staircase window are key elements of the Moderne style of the building which are clearly visible across the appeal site.

Even with the addition of the proposed roof to the appeal dwelling, views of the listed building would still be possible from the street and the key elements of the side elevation I identified above, would not be obscured. The historic and architectural significance of the listed building could still be fully appreciated. The proposed alterations to the appeal building would be visible from the listed building but it would not affect the historical or architectural interest of the listed building. The impact of the proposed development on the setting of the listed building would therefore be a neutral one. 1 Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guidance October 2016

In reaching this view, I have had regard to Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the special regard I should give to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

I find no conflict with Policy CDH08 of the LP which seeks to ensure that designated heritage assets including listed buildings are conserved and enhanced in a manner appropriate to their significance.

Full details of the proposal for a two storey dwelling on the appeal site which was refused by the Council in 19972 are not before me. In any event, this carries very limited weight in my consideration of this appeal as it was in excess of 27 years ago when different development plan policies would have prevailed.

The appeal decision relating to a site at the rear of 47 Downage3 was for the erection of a single storey dwelling on a plot which the Inspector described as ‘uncharacteristically small and thin’. It is not comparable to the proposal before me for additional accommodation to an existing dwelling at first floor level.

In addition to the standard time condition, it is necessary to specify the approved plans in the interests of certainty. A condition relating to materials is not necessary as these are set out on the planning application form.

The proposed development would adhere to the development plan and there are no material considerations that outweigh this finding. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.