Appeal 6000107

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of existing detached garage building and erection of 2 storey side and rear extensions, single storey rear extension, 2 storey front extension, single storey front porch canopy, new roof, alteration to existing fenestration and changes to external appearance at [site address] , Chislehurst, Bromley [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application [name]/24/03736/FULL6, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

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: MP/699/BP-10 Site location plan and block plan; MP/699/PD-11 Proposed floor layouts, elevations, roof plan and outline section, all dated September 2024.

Before the development hereby permitted is first occupied, the proposed first floor windows in the side elevations shall be obscure glazed to a minimum of Pilkington privacy Level 4 and shall be non-opening unless the parts of the window which can be opened are more than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which the window is installed. Thereafter, the window shall be permanently retained as such.

I have also dealt with another appeal (Ref: 6000143) on this site. That appeal is subject of a separate decision. ____________________________________________________________________________________________

The main issue is the effect of the appeal proposal on the character and appearance of the area which is within the Marlings Park Estate Area of Special Residential Character (ASRC).

In the ASRC the majority of houses are two storey detached properties in plots with good size front and rear gardens regularly laid out onto long roads. Most houses are good quality [name] or Arts and Craft architectural design combining materials such as half timbering, weatherboarding, hung tiling, brickwork or render with various types of often multilevel roofs. Most windows are multipaneled case and bow windows. This gives the area special and distinctive qualities.

The appeal site is a detached dwelling set within a good sized plot. Constructed of brickwork which has been painted, the dwelling has a steeply pitched roof with flat roof dormer windows at first floor level, features which somewhat differ from those of surrounding properties where hipped roofs and forward gable projections are commonplace. Therefore, whilst the appeal property has an attractive, cottage-like appearance, it does not reflect the overall special and distinctive qualities of many of the properties in the ASRC.

The appeal proposal would increase the size of the existing dwelling significantly. In this respect, the proposal would be contrary to the requirement in Policy 6 of the Bromley Local Plan, adopted January 2019 (LP) which requires that the scale and form of alterations respects those of the host dwelling.

However, the removal of the detached garage to the side would ensure that space would be retained between the appeal site and the neighbouring property such that it would not harmfully detract from the spacious character of the area. The crown roof would appear as a hipped roof from most public vantage points and reduce its visual mass. A gable projection on the front elevation with bay windows to the ground floor would replicate features found on other properties on Marlings Park Avenue. In this respect, the proposed works would result in a dwelling which complements and is compatible with the character of surrounding dwellings and the special qualities of the ASRC.

Taken together, the appeal proposal would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the area or the special and distinctive qualities of the ASRC. [name] have found that there would be some conflict with Policy 6 of the LP in terms of the scale of the proposed alterations, I have also found that the proposal would result in a dwelling which is compatible with development in the surrounding area and on balance, I conclude that no overall conflict with Policy 6 of the LP would arise. In addition, no conflict would arise with Policies 37 and 44 of the Bromley Local Plan, adopted January 2019 (LP) which require development to positively contribute to the existing street scene and respect, enhance and strengthen the special and distinctive qualities of the ASRC.

There would be no unacceptable impact on the neighbouring occupiers arising from the single storey rear extension given the overall height of the proposal and ____________________________________________________________________________________________ the degree of separation between the properties. The two storey rear extension would located to the north of number 52 and has a hipped roof. As a result, the extension would not be overbearing nor unacceptably affect the living conditions of those occupiers in terms of loss of light.

The extensions would be 1.5 metres from the boundary with number 48. The proposal would not be unacceptably overbearing or result in the loss of light to a harmful extent given the separation distance between the two properties, the extent of projection and the provision of a hipped roof.

Mutual overlooking of rear gardens already occurs from first floor windows and a condition requiring that the windows on the side elevations of the host dwelling are obscure glazed and non-opening to a height of 1.7 metres will prevent overlooking from these.

Provisions relating to the [name] etc. Act 1996 are not relevant to my consideration of the appeal.

In addition to the standard time condition, it is necessary to specify the approved plans in the interests of certainty.

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