Single storey extension at 36 Downsway, South Croydon CR2 0JA

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 17 August 2022 by Hannah Guest BSc (Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 23 SEPTEMBER 2022 Appeal Ref: APP/L5240/D/21/3289816 36 Downsway, South Croydon CR2 0JA • 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 & Mrs Peabody against the decision of London Borough of Croydon. • The application Ref 21/03723/HSE, dated 12 July 2021, was refused by notice dated 26 October 2021. • The development proposed is single storey extension at 36 Downsway, South Croydon CR2 0JA. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for single storey extension at 36 Downsway, South Croydon, CR2 0JA in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/03723/HSE, dated 12 July 2021, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 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 dwelling. 3) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Existing Floor Plans and Elevations 01 (May 2021); Proposed Floor Plans and Elevations 10 (July 2021); Proposed Site Plan and Location Plan 11 (July 2021). Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. Reasons 3. Downsway is lined with large mature trees, which, together with planting in front gardens and soft front boundary treatments provides a very verdant character. It is made up predominantly of large detached and semi-detached 2- storey houses, each set back from the road a similar distance creating both a degree of uniformity and sense of spaciousness. The houses follow the sloping topography of the highway with some elevated slightly above the highway and others set slightly below. Appeal Decision APP/L5240/D/21/3289816 2 4. The form of the houses varies, although they share common features, including bay style windows and porches. Most of the houses also have side extensions, often garages, or detached garages positioned to the side. Many of the extensions and outbuildings project a short distance forward of the principal elevation. This regular, although modest, front projection of features, extensions and outbuildings is a positive characteristic of the street that adds visual interest to the street scene. 5. The appeal property is located on one of the steepest sections of the highway, although is positioned level with it. Taking account of the topography, the existing detached single garage is set slightly above the host dwelling at a similar level to the neighbouring property. The front elevation of the garage is flush with the principal elevation of the house, although the bay windows and porch canopy that form part of the principal elevation project a short distance further forward. 6. The proposed extension would replace the existing garage. Although it would be slightly taller, the increase in height is small, and the pitched roof form to the front of the extension would be a positive addition that would be in keeping with the host dwelling and other extensions and outbuildings on the street. While it would protrude past the principal elevation, the protrusion wouldn’t be significantly greater than the existing bay windows and porch canopy. Given this, the proposal’s modest scale and that it would use materials to match the existing house, it would appear subservient to and respect the appearance of the host dwelling. Furthermore, the front projection is of a scale that would be characteristic of and in keeping with other extensions and outbuildings on the street. 7. For these reasons, the proposal would have regard to the appearance of the street, in line with paragraph 4.13 of the Council’s Suburban Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2019) (Design Guide). It would also accord with the detailed guidance regarding single storey front extensions at paragraph 4.14.1, which advises they should generally be no deeper than 1.5m and should avoid being full width; overly wide or deep. 8. Accordingly, in relation to the main issue, the proposal would respect the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. As such it would accord with policies SP4 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) and the Design Guide that seek to, amongst other things, ensure high quality development that respects and enhances local character. Conclusion 9. For the reasons given above, considering the development plan as a whole and all relevant material considerations, the appeal is allowed subject to the conditions above. Hannah Guest INSPECTOR