Conversion of garage to use as habitable space and new side access gate into garden

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 17 May 2018 by D Cramond BSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 31 May 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/P3610/D/18/3197827 12 Redwood Drive, Epsom, KT19 8FL  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mr Gavin Williams against the decision of Epsom and Ewell Borough Council.  The application Ref 17/01181/FLH, dated 24 October 2017, was refused by notice dated 26 December 2017.  The development proposed is the conversion of garage to use as habitable space and new side access gate into garden. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the conversion of garage to use as habitable space and new side access gate into garden at 12 Redwood Drive, Epsom, KT19 8FL in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 17/01181/FLH, dated 24 October 2017, subject to the following conditions: 1. The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 3. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: 5120/001. Preliminary Matter 2. The appeal site lies in Green Belt. I would agree with the Council, for the reasons given in its Planning Report, that there would be no material ramifications under this designation and I therefore do not need to consider Green Belt issues any further. Main Issues 3. The main issues are the effect of the proposal on i) parking provision and ii) the character and appearance of the locality. Appeal Decision APP/P3610/D/18/3197827 2 Reasons 4. The appeal property is a three storey/four bedroom end-terrace dwelling, located in a small crescent on the north-west side of Redwood Drive and facing over a small green. It has a shallow two storey front projection and an integrated single garage. This dwelling, like others locally has pleasing elevations and the built and landscaped surrounds come together to form a neighbourhood of agreeable appearance and coherent established character. The proposal is as described above. The elements are linked as the garage currently provides through access to the rear garden but when converted the existing door would be blocked with a triple-pane window inserted; the proposed gate would offer a replacement access point. Parking provision 5. The Council makes the point that a four bedroom property within the Borough must provide at least three spaces, preferably off-street, in order to comply with parking standards and relevant policy. The Appellant argues that even with the loss of the garage 3 spaces would be available. One of these is allocated in a close-by off road group and two would be available along the property’s immediate frontage. Because of the atypical nature of this small crescent, with its ancillary road being ‘by-passed’ by the main Redwood Drive route, it has become convention for the 4 dwellings along it to use the most immediate side of it for frontage parking. I witnessed this in use and it was clear to me that in reality this causes no hazard or convenience issues. It therefore seems reasonable to me in this unusual case to count the two potential spaces to the front of the appeal property as being part of the overall 3 total requirement. I recognise that these two spaces would be not strictly ‘off-street’ but they would be very functional, convenient and not harmful to other residents or road users. 6. Policy DM37 of the Development Management Policies Document 2015 (DMP) is the policy concerned with parking standards. I conclude there would be no conflict with this policy. Character and appearance 7. The Council is concerned that the insertion of the proposed side access gate would disrupt the strong visual presence of the existing brick wall along the street elevation within this carefully planned neighbourhood. I do agree that this well designed and executed wall is an attractive and composite part of local distinctiveness here. However it is of not inconsiderable length and bold appearance and in my opinion its aesthetic qualities would remain as the predominant part of this stretch of street even with planned insertion of a timber gate. The gate would be very much in visual terms an ancillary element of the immediate scene as a whole and the wall would continue in its architectural and function role largely unchanged. 8. Policies DM9 and DM10 of the DMP, taken together and amongst other matters, call for high quality design with development which should safeguard local environment and character. I conclude there would be no conflict with these policies. Appeal Decision APP/P3610/D/18/3197827 3 Conditions 9. The Council suggests the standard commencement condition along with the requirement for materials to match the existing building. I agree this latter condition would be appropriate in the interests of visual amenity. I also agree that there should be a condition that works are to be carried out in accordance with listed, approved, plan; to provide certainty. Overall conclusion 10. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal proposal would not have unacceptable adverse effects on parking provision or on the character and appearance of the locality. Accordingly the appeal is allowed. D Cramond INSPECTOR