Appeal 6002465

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character or appearance of the host dwelling and the Bungalow Estate Conservation Area (BECA).

Parkway is a predominantly residential street comprising primarily single-storey dwellings. The appeal property is a detached bungalow located within the BECA. The surrounding area is defined by inter-war bungalows of broadly consistent design, set back from the highway behind front gardens, many of which have been adapted for parking. As outlined in the Council’s BECA Design Guide (2018), the key features contributing to the Conservation Area’s character include the strong rhythm and pattern created by these bungalows, together with their largely intact detailing such as bay windows, recessed entrance doors, ornamental timbering and finials. Collectively, these elements establish a coherent and harmonious streetscape and a strong sense of place. There is evidence of modest front porches in the area.

The proposed development comprises the erection of a front porch and the enlargement of one of the existing bay windows. There are several examples of similar front porches and enlarged bays within the surrounding area, and the appellant contends that these features form part of an established pattern of development. In this context, the proposed enlargement of the bay window is not Appeal Planning Officer 6002465 considered to result in harm to the character or appearance of the property or the wider street scene.

Porches are not uncommon locally, however, the depth of projection in this case would exceed the limits set out in the [name]. As a result, the porch would fail to remain subservient to the bay windows, which are intended to remain the dominant architectural features on the principal elevation. Its increased prominence would disrupt the established hierarchy of elements on the facade, undermining the balance that characterise the surrounding dwellings. The porch as proposed would not respect the proportions or architectural composition of the host property.

The proposed development would cause harm to the character, appearance and historical significance of the appeal property and surrounding area to which I ascribe considerable importance and weight. The proposal would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of the BECA. In such circumstances, paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework states the harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal including, where appropriate, securing its optimum viable use. The development does provide additional space living space, but this would primarily benefit the occupiers of the appeal premises. No other public benefits have been put forward. As such, there are no public benefits which would outweigh the identified harm.

Therefore, the proposal would be in conflict with LP26, LP30, and LP33 of the Redbridge Local Plan 2015-2030 (2018), Policy HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and the guidance contained within the [name] (2018). Together these, amongst other things, seek to ensure new development complements the character and of the host building and does not result in unacceptable harm to the character or visual amenity of the built environment by preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed.