Appeal 6005796

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey outbuilding, measuring 9.53m x 5.72m, of traditional construction, rendered walls and pitched roof with living accommodation and shower room at [site address] , [site address] , Southend-on-Sea [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/01335/FUL, the plans submitted with it, and subject to the following condition:

The building hereby permitted shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling known as no [site address] .

The application form states the development was started in January 2025 and completed in September 2025. This weighs neither for, nor against, the appeal which I have determined on the basis of the submitted plans.

The adjacent flat roofed shed is detached from the outbuilding and does not form part of the development the subject of this appeal.

The main issue is the effect of the development upon the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area.

The appeal site comprises a detached bungalow occupying a corner plot at the junction of [address] and [address]. This neighbourhood of Southend-on-Sea has been spatially planned to provide detached two storey and single storey dwellings with both front and rear gardens on a grid street pattern. Boundary treatments are mixed, with a predominance of low-level enclosures to the frontages and brick walls to side and rear boundaries, especially where they are streetside, and the site is reflective of this. Sheds, garages and outbuildings are visible within the locality, in some cases appearing substantial within the rear garden areas.

The hipped roof of the outbuilding at the appeal site reflects the host dwelling’s roof form whilst its orientation and siting integrate the structure into its setting and minimise its visibility within the street scene. A solid brick boundary wall for the depth of the garden provides effective majority screening.

The host dwelling is not undermined by the outbuilding which is clearly subservient in scale, form and positioning. Materials used are complementary to the host dwelling and the wider street scene. As such, the development does not have an unacceptable harmful effect on the character and appearance of the site or the surrounding area.

For the above reasons, I find no conflict with Policies KP2 and CP4 of the [name] (2007) or Policies DM1 and DM3 of the Southend-on-Sea Borough Council Local Planning Framework Development Management Document (2015). Taken together, these policies require development to make a positive contribution, focussing on high quality design, local distinctiveness and the effective use of land.

Furthermore, the development accords with the approach to achieving good design as set out in the National Design Guide (2021) and the [name] and Townscape Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2009).

Submissions from interested parties raise concerns the outbuilding would be capable of independent occupation. A direct access onto [address] has since been infilled so that the outbuilding is only accessed via the main dwelling / garden. The attached planning condition will prevent the outbuilding from functioning independently of the host dwelling.

Each planning application and appeal must be dealt with according to their individual merits and the existence of similar development in the locality would not override any conflict that a proposal may have with the development plan. Therefore, the development does not set a precedent for other similar development.

Any private restrictive covenants affecting the site are a separate legal matter outside of the appeal process and are not a material planning consideration in my

Legislation requires the imposition of a condition specifying the period for commencement of the development however, given that the works have been commenced, it is unnecessary in this case. Likewise, the development has been completed so that there is no need for a condition to require completion in accordance with specified plans.

To ensure the building cannot be utilised as a separate or independent form of accommodation, I have attached a condition requiring the outbuilding be occupied only for purposes ancillary to the appeal property.

For the reasons given above, the appeal should be allowed.