Appeal 6003497

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are the effects of the proposals on: (i) the character and appearance of the host property and the Chelsfield Park Area of Special Residential Character, and (ii) the living conditions of the occupiers of Fortrose, with particular regard to outlook.

The appeal property is a large part 3-storey, part 2-storey and part single-storey detached house that has been extended in the past and occupies a relatively deep triangular plot of sloping land. It is situated within the Chelsfield Park Area of Special Residential Character (ASRC) which the Bromley Local Plan describes as having a distinct character resulting mostly from its “spacious sylvan, landscaped and semi-rural setting combined with the wide variety in the styles, sizes and designs of houses.” [site address] comprises detached houses of varied age, size, and appearance set back from the road within reasonably deep plots. The spaciousness verdant character of the area is a matter to which I attach significant weight.

Whilst the majority of the houses in the area face the road, the appeal property is set at an angle to the road and is to all intents and purposes arranged at right angles to its closest neighbour, Fortrose. This arrangement and the closeness between the 2 properties creates an uncomfortable and anomalous juxtaposition.

The proposal would comprise the erection of a single-storey rear extension with a pitched roof that would project about 8m beyond the rear elevation of the appeal property. This would significantly increase the footprint of the host property and would be situated to the rear of, and close to, Fortrose. This would exacerbate the already awkward relationship between the 2 neighbouring houses and result in a particularly densely developed area entirely at odds with the prevailing pattern of development in this area.

Due to its siting and size, I therefore conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the host property and the ASRC. For these reasons, the proposal is contrary to Policies 6 and 37 of the London Borough of Bromley Local Plan (2019) (BLP) which, amongst other matters, seek to ensure that the scale and form of construction respects or complements the host dwelling and is compatible with development in the surrounding area. There is also conflict with the aims of Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) (LP) and the Council’s Urban Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2023) which seeks the reinforcement of local character and identity.

The appeal proposal would be a short distance away from the boundary at the rear of Fortrose. This property has an uncharacteristically shallow rear garden and therefore the proposal would also be relatively close to the rear elevation of this dwelling. The proposal would be a prominent feature in views from Fortrose. However, it would be set on lower ground than Fortrose and partly set into the sloping ground. As such I am satisfied that it would not enclose the rear of Fortrose to a degree that would unacceptably reduce outlook from rear windows or from the garden.

For these reasons I conclude that the proposal would not have an unacceptable effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Fortrose. It therefore accords with [name] 6 and 37 and LP Policy D3 in so far as they relate to the protection of existing residential occupiers from inappropriate development.

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