Appeal 6006134

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for an outbuilding at the rear of the garden as a home office, gym, and painting studio at [site address] , Greenwich, Eltham [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/4263/HD, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawings: 20257-020 [name] (Site plan and block plan), 20257-021 [name] (existing and proposed plans for outbuilding), and 20257-022 [name] (proposed elevations and sections for outbuilding).

The external materials of the development hereby permitted shall be constructed in the materials shown on the application form.

The outbuilding shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the dwelling known as [site address] and shall not be occupied as any form of self-contained residential accommodation.

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.

I have amended the description of development to exclude ‘with a householder application’ as this is not a description of development.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal property is a semi-detached dwelling, with side access to the rear garden. The overall plot is generous, with the dwelling set back from the highway at the front and a deep rear garden. The rear garden features mature shrubbery and trees, which similarly characterise the surrounding rear gardens. The overall character is a verdant and spacious one. Several of the neighbouring houses have outbuildings located at the end of the gardens, and these are visible from the appeal site.

The proposed outbuilding would be of a substantially larger size than the other outbuildings present at neighbouring properties. Notwithstanding this, the generous plot of the appeal site would prevent the development from appearing cramped or squeezed in. I observed on my site visit that there is a significant level of trees and shrubbery at both the appeal site and in the surrounding area, which will soften the appearance of the proposed development and aid its assimilation into the existing landscape. Furthermore, the materials of the outbuilding would be sensitive to the house, creating a distinct level of visual harmony between the two.

I recognise the concerns of the Council about the footprint and volume of the outbuilding in comparison with the garden and the house. I note its guidance 1 which suggests that outbuildings should be proportionate and subservient to the house and not dominate it. However, the very substantial area of the back garden; the distance between the house and the outbuilding; and the low height of the outbuilding are important spatial factors here. They mitigate the effect of the size of the outbuilding. In these circumstances, the outbuilding would not undermine the status of the house. Nor would it dominate the house, the back garden, or disrupt the spacious character of the back gardens in this area.

A certificate of lawful development (25/4263/HD) (CLD) has been granted for an outbuilding in a similar location at the appeal site since the submission of this appeal. However, the Council has not had the chance to comment on any implications for the appeal. It can therefore carry no weight in my considerations.

Notwithstanding this, even without the fallback consideration in the balance, the proposed development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore comply with Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) which requires development to positively respond to local distinctiveness through their layout, scale, appearance, and shape. It would further comply with Policies DH1 and DH(a) of the Royal Greenwich Local Plan: [name] with [name] (2014) which together require all development to provide a positive relationship between the proposed and existing urban context and be appropriate to the building and locality. It further aligns with the Royal Borough of Greenwich Supplementary Planning Document: [name] (2023) advising that particular attention should be given to the design in terms of scale, bulk, and height. 1 Royal Borough of [name] Planning Document (October 2023)

Other than the standard time limit condition, it is necessary to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans for the reason of certainty. In the interests of the character and appearance of the area, a condition relating to materials is also necessary. I have further attached a version of the condition suggested by the Council requiring the use of the proposed development to remain as ancillary to the appeal dwelling, modified to accord with Planning Practice Guidance. This is to preserve the amenity of the host dwelling and that of the surrounding properties.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.

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