Appeal 6009229

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a roof extension involving hip to gable with rear dormer windows and 2 No front-facing rooflights at [site address] , Whetstone, Barnet, London, [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 26/0682/HSE, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development shall be carried out only in accordance with following approved drawings: D07 Existing elevations D02 Existing first floor plan D01 Existing ground floor plan D05 Existing roof plan D08 Proposed elevations D03 Proposed first floor plan D04 Proposed loft plan D06 Proposed roof plan D09 Proposed section AA D11 Location plan D10 Block plan

The materials used in the external finishes to the built development hereby approved shall match or complement those of the main building.

It is noted that this scheme has previously been deemed unlawful under application Ref 26/0200/192 for a Certificate of [name] or Development. It is disputed whether there exists a fallback position with respect to a putative amended scheme compliant with permitted development limitations. These are not directly matters for this appeal, which falls for determination on individual merit. Any permitted development rights continue to apply irrespective of the outcome of the appeal.

The main issue in this appeal is the effect the development would have on the character and appearance of the host dwelling, on the semi-detached pair of which it forms part and on the wider locality.

With matching finishes, the proposed roof extension would be inherently compatible with the design of the existing dwelling at No [site address] .

There is no doubt that the modification of the main roof of No 49, from hipped to gable form, would result in a striking imbalance in the symmetry of the roofs of the semi-detached pair with No 51, where the latter retains the original hipped shape. At the same time, there is already a reduction in the symmetry of the pair due to a previous side extension to No 51.

Furthermore, and importantly, the surrounding residential area is characterised by a highly varied range of side and roof extensions to the semi-detached and detached houses that comprise the street scene. These result in similarly marked reductions in symmetry as well as contrasts in form between neighbouring properties. These are particularly evident, for example, at Nos [address], as well as at No 54 opposite the appeal site, whilst there would be a distinct contrast between the proposed gable and the hipped roof of No 47, which neighbours the appeal dwelling.

The proposed rear dormer would be close to the party wall but otherwise set into the rear roof slope, broadly in compliance with adopted supplementary design guidance for roof extensions. From the rear garden of the appeal property, many comparably substantial rear dormers are visible, including at No 53, two doors away. The two small front rooflights would be of little consequence to the overall appearance of the dwelling.

In this particular case, in the context of the markedly varied built forms in the immediately surrounding area, I do not consider that the proposed hip to gable roof extension, dormer and rooflights would together have any unacceptably adverse impact on the character or appearance of the host property, the semi-detached pair or the wider street scene as a whole.

For this reason, I see no significant conflict between the appeal proposal and the aims of the relevant Policies CDH01 and CDH05 of the Barnet Local Plan or D3 of the London Plan, regarding the design of house extensions.

The Council finds no objection on grounds of residential amenity and I agree.

There would be material planning benefit in the enlargement of this family dwelling, making fuller use of the site.

I therefore conclude that this appeal should be allowed and the permission sought granted, subject to the standard conditions set out above. This conclusion is further supported by the material benefit of the improved residential accommodation and use of the site that would result from the development.