Appeal 6001187

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing garage and construction of a single storey garage at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/03725/FPA, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

I have taken the description of development used in the heading above from the Council’s decision notice, for reasons of clarity, in that it references the demolition of the existing garage.

The Council notes that a small section of the appeal site lies within the Green Belt, while the remainder is adjacent to it. The Council is satisfied that proposed footprint of the garage would fall outside the Green Belt boundary and it raises no concerns in this regard. Based on the evidence before me, I see no reason to disagree.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site comprises a small parcel of [site address] (No.5). The site is at the end of a cul-de-sac and is occupied by a single storey garage which does not appear to be associated with any property in the cul-de-sac. The remainder of the site is undeveloped. As a result of the small scale of the garage and the undeveloped nature of much of the site, it contributes to the spacious and open character of the area. Surrounding development is generally characterised by pairs of semi-detached dwellings set back from the highway. There are both two storey dwellings and bungalows.

The proposed garage would be positioned closer to No.5. It would be of an increased depth, but the same width and a similar height, in comparison to the existing garage. Its similar scale would ensure that it would not be unduly prominent within the street scene, when compared to the existing garage. The small scale of the garage would also ensure that its positioning would not harmfully detract from the open character of the area. Additionally, a large portion of the site would remain undeveloped, similarly to the existing situation. There is also some variation in the visual gaps between properties along [address], largely due to the presence or absence of integral garages. As such, I do not consider that the scheme would result in unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the area.

The Council has drawn my attention to a previously refused planning application, which was also dismissed at appeal (Ref: 24/03641/FULL1). This scheme however sought permission for a two-storey dwelling. The proposed dwelling was of a greater scale than the proposed garage and that scheme also included considerable hardstanding to accommodate the dwelling and associated paraphernalia such as bin storage. I am therefore not satisfied that it is directly comparable to the appeal before me. The scheme refused under 25/01971/FULL1 sought permission to extend the garage. The resultant development would therefore have been of a much greater width in comparison to the garage proposed in the appeal scheme before me. Reference to these schemes has not altered my position.

Overall, for the reasons outlined above, the scheme would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore be in accordance with Policy 37 of the London Borough of Bromley Local Plan (2019) and Policy D3 of The London Plan (2021). Collectively, amongst other things, these policies seek to ensure that development positively responds to the local character of an area.

The Council is concerned that allowing this appeal could set an undesirable pattern for similar redevelopment in the area. However, each application and appeal must be determined on its individual merits, and a generalised concern regarding setting a precedent does not justify withholding permission in this case.

Concerns are raised by an interested party regarding an allegedly abandoned vehicle and household waste on the site. These matters however do not have a direct bearing on the outcome of my decision.

In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty. I have added a materials condition to ensure a satisfactory appearance. A condition to ensure that the new garage is not used for vehicle parking until a vehicle crossover has been applied for and approved by the Council, and constructed, is also necessary in the interests of highway safety.

I have not been directed to any planning policy that requires electrical car charging points. I have therefore not attached a condition to ensure this. I am also not satisfied that a condition to ensure the submission of details of hard and soft landscaping is necessary. There are no substantial trees on the site, and the submitted block plan indicates minimal changes to the remainder of the site. I am not satisfied that it has been adequately justified that a condition to restrict the use of the garage for the parking of vehicles is necessary. It is not uncommon for a garage to be used for other purposes, such as for domestic storage, and there is nothing before me to suggest that using the garage for such purposes would result in unacceptable harm. Any future change of use of the garage would require planning permission.

For the reasons given above, and having regard to all other matters, I conclude that the development would comply with the development plan. The appeal is therefore allowed.

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: • Location plan, [name]. 4604/OS • Proposed block plan, [name]. 3 • Proposed garage, [name]. 5

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

Prior to the first use of the garage hereby approved for vehicle parking, an application for a vehicle crossover to the front of the site shall be submitted to and approved by the Council. The garage shall not be used for parking vehicles until the crossover has been constructed in accordance with the approved details. **END OF SCHEDULE**