Appeal 6000919

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host building and the street scene.

The appeal property is a handsome 2-storey detached house featuring half-timbering, bay windows, and a hipped roof with a prominent street-facing gable. It is situated in a relatively spacious and verdant residential street featuring mainly detached houses of a variety of inter-war styles. [address] forms an intrinsic part of the Park Langley Area of Special Residential Character (ASRC) and the appeal property makes a clear positive contribution to the character and appearance of the street and the ASRC as a whole.

The proposal would include extensive rear and roof levels additions together with the complete re-modelling of the frontage of the house. The effect would be to create a dwelling of completely different external appearance. Whilst the existing house includes many of the architectural features that prevail in the area, the proposal would have a mock-Georgian frontage complete with a central bay with a pediment above, symmetrically arranged framed multi-pane sash windows, Juliet balconies, and a pediment above the garage door.

I note that there are some instances of Georgian-style architectural features on a small number of houses in the area and that there is a degree of variety in respect of architectural styles in the area. However, the incorporation of an overtly mock- Georgian frontage at the appeal site would be totally at odds with the prevailing characteristics of this section of [address]. The impact in this respect would be exacerbated by the increased height and bulk of the roof which would be apparent in oblique views towards the appeal site from the street. As such the proposal would be an overly prominent and incongruous feature in the street scene.

Due to its design height and bulk, I therefore conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the host building and the street scene. It therefore fails to accord with Policies 6 and 37 of the London Borough of Bromley Local Plan (2019) (BLP) which, amongst other matters, seek to ensure that the scale, form and materials of construction respects or complements the host dwelling, is compatible with development in the surrounding area and positively contributes to the street scene. There is also conflict with the aims of Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) and the Council’s Urban Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2023) which seeks the reinforcement of local character and identity.

The appellant has provided information on schemes carried out in other streets within the ASRC which have involved re-modelling and redevelopment in varying degrees of mock-Georgian styling. As each planning application and appeal needs to be considered on its individual merits having regard to its particular characteristics and context I attribute limited weight to these recent developments, some of which in my view demonstrate the harm that can occur from such schemes.

The Council’s reason for refusal refers to BLP Policy 8, which relates to side spaces. I do not find conflict with this policy.

For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail.