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 Free

Technical 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.

Get Free Review How it works →