Appeal 6007041

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a two-storey side to rear extension, single storey side extension, additional roof lights in side roof slope, external alterations at [site address] , Sudbury, Harrow, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/3059/25, subject to the following

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the submitted plans.

The materials used in the construction of the development hereby approved shall match those used in the existing building.

The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed extensions and alterations on the character and appearance of the property and the [address] Conservation Area.

The appeal site is a detached chalet style dwelling located on the southern end of [address]. [address] is a short, modern residential cul-de-sac that features flat-roof dormers, particularly so in the case of the appeal dwelling, running broadly perpendicular to the historic spine of [address]/[address]. [address] and the surrounding area is developed primarily with detached and semi-detached chalet bungalows with large rear gardens. There is a driveway at the front, with parking for 2 cars and a private rear garden with a lawn and patio area.

The site is located within the [address] Conservation Area, which is within the larger Harrow on the Hill Area of Special Character. To the east of the site is ‘[name] (on the opposite side of Green Lane, a pedestrian right-of-way at the rear of the site). The Council’s Conservation Officer states: “Whilst the houses along [address] are of limited architectural and historic interest in and of themselves, their similar unobtrusive scale and design unifies them...”.

Whilst the drawings that indicate the details of the proposal in terms of floor plans and elevations are clear, the drawings which illustrate the site and the positioning of the appeal building within it, are not particularly helpful. The site is large with quite extensive rear garden areas. The drawings that show the proposal in its site context indicate an area that closely encloses the building. [name] am referring to the 3-D renditions which are helpful in giving a picture of the scheme, but give no adequate indication of how it fits within its site and its immediate surroundings, in particular with the Green Lane pedestrian right of way at the rear of the site. My site visit enabled me to see that, although the frontage to Leabank close is very restricted, the rear of the house is in fact a very open area, with a substantial amount of planting and significant changes of ground level.

From the cul-de-sac, and the main public view of the proposed development, very little of the extensions would be visible. The proposed additions, in any event, are relatively modest and would not appear as conflicting with the design of the dwelling as it currently exists. The other public aspect is from the Green Lane. I walked down this Lane, which is well flanked with trees and shrubs to a position beyond the appeal site. From the Green Lane, the appeal site is largely hidden by trees and shrubs. To the extent that the proposed development could be seen, it would not appear at odds with the existing character of the host dwelling.

I conclude that the proposed extensions and alterations would not have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of the property or the [address] Conservation. The proposed development would leave the host dwelling as of limited architectural and historic interest, neutral in its effect on the conservation area. For these reasons the appeal will be allowed.

The council has not suggested any conditions for the event that the appeal is allowed. However, the statutory condition that provides a time limit on the start of development must be imposed. In addition, taking account of Planning Practice Guidance, I consider that a condition requiring completion in accordance with the plans should be imposed for certainty and avoidance of doubt as to the development permitted. I also consider that a condition is necessary that requires the materials to match the existing to ensure a satisfactory appearance to the development.