Appeal 6001878

The appeal is dismissed.

The description of development provided in the appeal form is different to that in the planning application form. Since neither main party has provided written confirmation that a revised description of development has been agreed, I have used the one given on the planning application form in the banner heading above.

The Council consulted on its Regulation 18 Local Plan in late 2025. Given the early stage of plan preparation, it attracts very limited weight in my consideration of this appeal.

The main issues are: • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; • whether the proposed development would provide satisfactory living conditions for future occupiers, with regard to outlook; and • the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, with reference to privacy and outlook.

The site lies at the end of [address], a predominantly residential cul-de-sac. It includes a two-storey end-of-terrace dwelling with a shallow frontage, associated garden space and an open parcel of land located opposite the dwelling. This land is largely laid to grass and vegetation and therefore provides a sense of space to the street scene.

The Sevenoaks Residential Character Area Assessment Supplementary Planning Document 2021 sets out that [address] is characterised by short terraces which are set perpendicular to each other and overlook landscaped parking areas. The area has a cohesive character created by the similar scale and consistent design and materials of the dwellings. Albeit subtle, the row of terraces that the site belongs to has a staggered building line, while the height of the dwellings steps down towards the end of the cul-de-sac.

The appeal scheme seeks to construct a detached dwelling on the side garden of [address] (No 14). It would therefore introduce a type of dwelling that would not be typical of the street scene. Moreover, due to its siting further forward than No 14, the new dwelling would project beyond the prevailing building line on the street and appear conspicuous. While the new dwelling would remain at two-storey with roof accommodation, it would be taller than No 14, thereby disrupting the existing pattern of building height along the terrace and further emphasising its presence with the street scene. Consequently, the dwelling would result in an incongruous termination to the street scene that would clash with the existing terraces and harm its cohesive character.

The proposed development further comprises the construction of a detached car barn with a flat above. Despite its height, due to its substantial footprint, scale and mass it would be a large structure that would not form a subservient addition to the street scene. Further, the siting of this building would erode the spaciousness of the vegetated parcel of land and appear cramped. While its design would reflect the wider context, including the design of the properties within [address], the introduction of a building in this location would be inconsistent with the established layout of development within [address], which comprises buildings on the opposite side of the road only.

Overall, the resultant residential built form would be a dominant and intrusive form of development at the end of the cul-de-sac, which would feel unduly intensive and harm the sense of spaciousness, as well as the existing pattern of development. As such, the development would fail to integrate into its local context. The use of appropriate external materials would not overcome this harm.

Thus, the proposal would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would be contrary to Policy SP1 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2011 (CS), Policy EN1 of the Allocations and Development Management Plan 2015 (ADMP), and Policy C4 of the Sevenoaks Town Neighbourhood Plan 2020-2038 (2023) (NP). Amongst other things, these policies support new development that is designed to a high quality and responds to the distinctive local character of the area in which it is situated.

The proposed dwelling would have windows serving habitable rooms that would face the car barn. The buildings would be sited in an angled position, but given the proximity between them, due to the bulk and mass of the car barn, it would appear unduly conspicuous in views from the front windows on the dwelling. While bedroom 4 within the roof space would only be served by rooflights and have a limited outlook, this is a common design solution for rooms within a roof space which would be acceptable. However, overall, the proposal would create a poor outlook for the future residents of the dwelling because of the uncomfortably close relationship with the car barn.

Bedroom 2 within the proposed flat would rely on rooflights to provide outlook for occupiers. While the rooflights would ensure this bedroom would receive adequate light, their position within the angled roof slope and internal height from the finished floor level, with views skyward, would not provide suitable levels of outlook, resulting in unacceptably oppressive conditions for future occupiers. While it would not be necessary to provide these rooflights in obscure glazing because of their position within the roof, this would not render the outlook from these rooflights acceptable.

Thus, the proposed development would fail to provide satisfactory living conditions for future occupiers with regard to outlook, contrary to ADMP Policy EN2. Amongst other things, this policy supports development that provides adequate residential amenities for future occupiers.

The proposal would result in the introduction of a large car barn opposite the front elevations of No 14 and of [address] (No 12). The front windows within these properties overlook the landscaped parking areas on the opposite side of the road with the buildings within [address] beyond. [address] is a relatively narrow cul-de-sac and therefore Nos 12 and 14 would have direct aspect over this element of the proposed development.

Due to the narrow nature of this road and the proximity between these buildings, including Nos 12 and 14’s front facing windows serving habitable rooms, these occupiers would have direct vantage over the bulk and mass of the car barn. This building would therefore appear conspicuous in views out of the front windows at Nos 12 and 14 and harm the outlook for the occupiers of these properties. The use of appropriate materials and provision of soft-landscaping would not offset the harm on the outlook of these neighbours created by the amount and proximity of the built form.

The daylight and sunlight received by the neighbouring properties would be maintained to an acceptable standard. Given the angled relationship and gap between the car barn and [address] (No 10), the proposal would not have a significant effect on the outlook from the front windows within this dwelling. Further, the angle and internal height of the rooflights within the car barn would ensure an adequate protection of the privacy of adjoining neighbours. However, this would not offset the harm in relation to the outlook of the residents at Nos 12 and 14.

Consequently, the proposal would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Nos 12 and 14, with reference to outlook, in conflict with ADMP Policy EN2. Amongst other things, this policy supports development that provides adequate residential amenities for existing occupiers.

The Council has previously granted planning permission1 for the construction of a new dwelling within the site. However, this pertained to a terraced dwelling and therefore would not provide justification for the proposed development, which would be harmful in its own right.

While the site could become unkept and subject to some antisocial behaviour which may require address, I remain to be convinced that the appeal scheme is the only means to ensure that this would not be the case. As such, this has limited influence on this appeal.

The Council accept they cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites, which is not disputed by the appellant. In such circumstances, paragraph 11 d) ii of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) states that permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole.

The appeal scheme would be acceptable in relation to matters including highway safety and drainage. However, these are neutral factors that neither weigh for or against the development.

In terms of benefits, the proposed development would deliver two additional dwellings in an accessible location to contribute to the housing stock within the Borough. Additionally, the proposal would logically reduce the pressure for development in the Green Belt. There would be some economic benefits accrued from the construction process, as well as longer term expenditure in the local economy. Biodiversity enhancements would be delivered. However, given the small number of units proposed, these benefits taken together attract moderate weight in favour of the appeal scheme.

While the Framework strongly promotes the effective use of land and the provision of housing on underutilised land, that is not at the expense of good quality design nor of the standard of amenity for existing and future users. Therefore, the conflict between the proposal and CS Policy SP1, [name] EN1 and EN2 and NP Policy C4 should be given significant weight in this appeal.

Thus, the adverse impacts of the proposal significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole. As a result, the presumption in favour of sustainable development does not apply.

The proposal conflicts with the development plan and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it. For the reasons given above the appeal is dismissed. [planning inspector] INSPECTOR 1 [name] 07/01262/FUL