Construction of two dormer windows to front elevation

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 27 June 2024 by M Long BA (Hons) MSc MRTPI Decision by M Russell BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 11th July 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/B5480/D/24/3341275 9 Collerne Street, Romford, Havering RM3 9FE • 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 Charles Mugagga against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Havering. • The application Ref is P1839.23. • The development proposed is the construction of two dormer windows to front elevation. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Appeal Procedure 2. The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons for the Recommendation 4. The site is located within a residential estate characterised by buildings that share a similar design style. The appeal dwelling forms part of a row of houses with pitched roofs sloping towards the street that are bookended by dwellings with gables. There is much consistency in design within the dwellings facing on to Collerne Street including in terms of their materials, window proportions, canopies above the front doors and their mostly plain front roof slopes. Though there are rooflights on the front elevation of the appeal property, they have a discreet presence and do not detract from the overriding order and cohesive appearance of the streetscene. 5. I acknowledge that the dormers would be set in from the eaves, sides and ridgeline of the host roof with a gap between the dormers and matching materials proposed. Each dormer would also only marginally exceed the guidance in The Havering Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (2011) which specifies that the width of dormers should be no greater than 1.2 metres. Even accounting for these factors, the dormers would be uncharacteristic features that would appear incongruous within the otherwise plain front roof slopes facing on to Collerne Appeal Decision APP/B5480/D/24/3341275 2 Street. As a result, the proposal would unacceptably detract from the cohesion and consistent design style across the front elevations of this group of dwellings. 6. The appellant has drawn my attention to a front dormer window at a nearby property and I observed this on my site visit. Even so, from what I saw, front dormers are not common on the wider residential estate. Furthermore, that particular example is located on a different road and is not seen within the context of the group of properties in which the appeal dwelling sits. It is also a single dormer of a more modest scale and so is not comparable to the appeal scheme which proposes two larger dormer windows. 7. Overall, the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area. It would conflict with Policies 7 and 26 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 (2021) which require that residential development is of a high design quality and that proposals respect, reinforce and complement the local streetscene. Conclusion and Recommendation 8. The proposed development would be contrary to the development plan. For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed. M Long APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER Inspector’s Decision 9. I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s recommendation and on that basis the appeal is dismissed. M Russell INSPECTOR