Single storey side return extension

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 9 March 2021 by C Rafferty LLB (Hons), Solicitor Decision by R C Kirby BA(Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 March 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/G5180/D/20/3265450 27 Reddons Road, Beckenham BR3 1LY • 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 Chris Baker against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Bromley. • The application Ref DC/20/03178/FULL6, dated 17 August 2020, was refused by notice dated 4 November 2020. • The development proposed is a single storey side return extension. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a single storey side return extension at 27 Reddons Road, Beckenham BR3 1LY, in accordance with the terms of the application DC/20/03178/FULL6 dated 17 August 2020 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 development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Site Location Plan & Block Plan Drawing No M2011/001 Rev F2 dated 8 June 2020; Proposed Plans, Drawing No: M2011\110 Rev F6 dated 8 June 2020; Proposed Elevations and Section, Drawing No: M2011\115 Rev F5 dated 17 June 2020; Proposed Section, Drawing No: M2011\116 Rev F4 dated 30 June 2020. Appeal Procedure 2. The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. Preliminary Matters 3. The description of development has been taken from the decision notice, as it is more succinct than that provided on the application form. Main Issue 4. The main issue is the effect of the development on the living conditions of neighbouring residents at 29 Reddons Way with particular regard to outlook and light. Appeal Decision APP/G5180/D/20/3265450 2 Reasons for the Recommendation 5. The appeal site comprises a semi-detached dwelling, which from the rear forms a ‘U’ shape with the neighbouring property at No. 29. The dwellings benefit from long rear gardens separated by a tall boundary fence. The appeal property has an additional wrap-around single storey rear extension on the southern side, while a further single storey projection is present on the northern side of No. 29. 6. The proposal would enlarge the single storey rear extension across the entire width of the dwelling. It would extend the depth of the northern side of the property, introducing a solid element of built form along the boundary with No. 29. This would be visible from the windows along both the rear and south facing elevations of No. 29 as well as from the rear garden and would create a change in outlook experienced from these locations when looking towards the appeal site. 7. However, the extension, would not be much taller than the existing boundary fence and as such the outlook from the windows in No. 29 would not be significantly different to the existing situation. It would not appear dominant or overbearing from the back garden or southern windows of No. 29. Similarly, the main outlook from the rear windows of No. 29 looking towards the rear garden would remain unchanged. 8. The host property is located in a southerly direction to No. 29, and the 2 storey built form of the existing dwelling is likely to cast shadow over the rear of No. 29 at certain times of the day. The single storey design of the extension would not lead to a significant loss of light at No. 29 over and above the existing situation. Consequently, its presence would be unlikely to make the rear rooms of No 29 and its garden less pleasant to use. 9. For the reasons given above I find that the development would not be harmful to the living conditions of neighbouring residents at 29 Reddons Road in terms of loss of outlook or light. As such, it would accord with Policies 6 and 37 of the London Borough of Bromley Local Development Framework Local Plan Planning Division January 2019 which seek to ensure that development respects the amenity of occupiers of neighbouring buildings. Conditions 10. The standard time limit condition as well as a condition that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans are necessary for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. A condition dictating the materials of the proposal is superfluous as these are noted on the approved plans. Conclusion and Recommendation 11. There are no material considerations that indicate the appeal should be determined other than in accordance with the development plan. For the reasons given above, I therefore recommend that the appeal is allowed. C Rafferty APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER Appeal Decision APP/G5180/D/20/3265450 3 Inspector’s Decision 12. I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report, and, on that basis, the appeal is allowed with the suggested conditions. R C Kirby INSPECTOR