Appeal 6003309

The appeal is dismissed.

Since the determination of this application, the London Borough of Harrow Local Plan 2021-2041 (2026) (the Local Plan) has been adopted and now forms the adopted local plan. As such, the [name] (2012) and the Development Management Policies (2013) have been superseded, and I have determined the appeal on this basis. The relevant policies have not materially changed, and as such I am satisfied that no party’s interests have been prejudiced.

Whilst the reason for refusal within the decision notice makes reference to the character of the area, the Council confirm within their appeal statement that the sole reason for refusal relates to the effect on family sized homes.

Therefore, the main issue is the effect of the proposal on the supply of family sized homes.

The appeal property forms a detached single storey dwelling with a footprint of approximately [address] metres. The proposal would extend the existing dwelling, converting it to five individual flats of between one and two bedrooms, each with a gross internal floor area (GIA) of between 50 and [address] metres.

Policy HO2 of the Local Plan seeks to ensure that residential conversions into multiple homes do not have a detrimental impact on the stock of family sized housing. The policy requires proposals for the conversion of family sized homes into smaller self-contained residential units to provide at least one family sized home with a GIA of at least [address] metres and be capable of providing a 3- bedroom, 4-person dwelling.

Whilst the existing dwelling may only have two bedrooms, it is significantly above the [address] metre GIA Policy HO2 identified as a family sized dwelling, and would therefore likely be capable of providing at least three bedrooms. The proposal would therefore result in the loss of a family sized dwelling. Given the proposed flats are notably below the required [address] metre GIA for a family sized dwelling, the appeal development would not mitigate this loss.

For the above reasons, the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the provision of family sized homes and therefore conflict with Policy HO2 of the Local Plan.

The proposal would result in five dwellings on a small brownfield site, within a sustainable location close to shops and services, providing acceptable parking levels and living conditions for future occupiers, and replacing impermeable surfaces with permeable ones including opportunities for planting. Further, there would be some economic benefits during the construction phase and for local businesses from future occupiers. Nonetheless, these benefits do not outweigh the above identified harm to the supply of family sized homes.

Whilst the proposal may not harm the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, a lack of harm is not a benefit and therefore weighs neither for nor against the proposal.

The appellant raises the time taken for the Council to determine the application, however this is a procedural matter and not something I can consider as part of this appeal.

Paragraph 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. I have weighed the considerations in favour of the appeal proposal against the policy conflicts I have identified. As a result, I find that the other considerations do not outweigh the policies of the development plan and therefore the appeal should be determined in accordance with its policies.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.