Erection of a first floor side extension and installation of an access door at ground floor level
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Extensions
Residential Amenity
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 26 November 2021
by S Poole BA(Hons) DipArch MPhil MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date:20TH December 2021
Appeal Ref: APP/N5090/D/21/3285320
22 Buckingham Avenue, London N20 9BX
• 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 Mrs Krishna Rathod against the decision of the Council of the
London Borough of Barnet.
• The application Ref 21/4392/HSE, dated 6 August 2021, was refused by notice dated
6 October 2021.
• The development proposed is the erection of a first floor side extension and installation
of an access door at ground floor level.
Procedural Matter
1. The description of development has been amended to exclude references to
internal changes that do not in themselves constitute development.
Decision
2. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a
first floor side extension and installation of an access door at ground floor level
at 22 Buckingham Avenue, London N20 9BX in accordance with the terms of
the application, Ref 21/4392/HSE, dated 6 August 2021, subject to the
conditions in the attached schedule.
Main Issue
3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of
the host building and the surrounding area.
Reasons
4. The appeal property is a 2-storey semi-detached house that occupies a corner
site next to the junction between Buckingham Avenue and Langton Avenue. It
is located in a residential area comprising a mix of detached and semi-detached
houses, many of which have been extended to the side resulting in generally
close spacing between houses.
5. The appeal property and its attached pair, 20 Buckingham Avenue, would have
originally been a mirrored pair. The symmetry between the front elevations of
the pair has been disrupted due to a first floor addition to the side of No.20.
The appeal proposal would comprise the erection of a first floor side extension.
This would re-establish a high degree of symmetry between the pair of houses
and represent a clear enhancement.
Appeal Decision APP/N5090/D/21/3285320
2
6. Due to its corner location, the proposal would be a prominent feature in the
street scene. However, development close to exposed side boundaries is a
characteristic of the area and therefore the harm in this respect is minor. On
balance, the benefits resulting from the re-instatement of the symmetry of the
pair of houses outweighs this harm.
7. For these reasons I conclude that the proposal would not have an unacceptable
effect on the character and appearance of the host building and the
surrounding area. It therefore accords with Policy CS5 of Barnet’s Local Plan
(Core Strategy) (2012), Policy DM01 of Barnet’s Local Plan (Development
Management Policies) (2012), and guidance contained in the Residential Design
Guidance SPD (2016). These policies and guidance seek to ensure that,
amongst other matters, new development is well designed, respects the
appearance, scale, and mass of surrounding buildings, and responds to the
existing character of an area.
Conditions
8. In addition to the standard time limit condition, I consider a materials condition
is required to safeguard the character and appearance of the area.
Furthermore, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper
planning, a condition requiring the approved development to be carried out in
accordance with the approved drawings is imposed.
9. To safeguard the privacy and amenities of the occupiers of properties on the
opposite side of Langton Avenue a condition is imposed requiring the window in
the flank elevation of the proposal to be glazed with obscure glass and the
opening part to be at least 1.8m above floor level.
Conclusion
10. For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I
conclude that the appeal should succeed.
S Poole
INSPECTOR
Schedule of Conditions
1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years
from the date of this decision.
2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance
with the following approved plans:
Block Plan A101 + A201 Draft 5
Ground Floor A101 + A202 Draft 5
First Floor A103 + A203 Draft 5
Loft Plan A104 + A204 Draft 5
Roof Plan A105 + A205 Draft 5
Section 1 A106 + A206 Draft 5
Section 2 A107 + A207 Draft 5
Front Elevation A108 + A208 Draft 5
Appeal Decision APP/N5090/D/21/3285320
3
Rear Elevation A109 + A209 Draft 5
Side Elevation 1 A110 + A210 Draft 5
Side Elevation 2 A11 +A211 Draft 5
3) 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.
4) Before the extension hereby permitted is first occupied the proposed
window in the flank elevation at first floor level shall be glazed with
obscure glass only and shall be permanently retained as such thereafter
and the opening part of the window must be at least 1.8m above the
floor of the room in which it is installed.
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.