For roof space to habitable use to include rear dormer windows and a conservation roof light to the side elevation of main roof

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 4 May 2023 by Mrs Chris Pipe BA(Hons), DipTP, MTP, MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date:17 May 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/B5480/D/23/3317391 15 Crossways, Havering, Romford RM2 6AA • 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 Amritpal Sahota against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Havering. • The application Ref P1621.22 dated 04 October 2022, was refused by notice dated 05 December 2022. • The development proposed is for roof space to habitable use to include rear dormer windows and a conservation roof light to the side elevation of main roof. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for roof space to habitable use to include rear dormer windows and a conservation roof light to the side elevation of main roof at 15 Crossways, Havering, Romford RM2 6AA in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P1621.22 dated 04 October 2022, and the plans submitted with it subject to the following condition: 1) Within one month of the date of this decision the roof-light installed to the side roof-slope shall be fitted with obscured glazing (not less than obscurity level 4), and no part of that window shall be capable of being opened. The window as permitted shall be retained thereafter. Procedural Matter 2. At the time of my site visit, the development was complete. The application made clear that the scheme was submitted retrospectively, and I have dealt with the appeal on that basis. 3. The Council reference the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) in the reason for refusal. This was superseded by a revised National Planning Policy Framework (2021) (the Framework). I note that the Appellant cites the revised Framework on this basis no party would be prejudiced or caused any injustice by me proceeding with the appeal in light of this minor discrepancy. Main Issue 4. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of Gidea Park Conservation Area. Reasons 5. The site is within the Gidea Park Conservation Area. In accordance with the statutory duty imposed by section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Appeal Decision APP/B5480/D/23/3317391 2 Conservation Areas) Act 1990; I am required to have special regard to the effect of the proposed development on the character or appearance of the area. 6. The Conservation Area is characterised by predominantly individually designed early 20th century properties influenced by the arts and crafts movement within mature gardens. Properties vary in design and the mature planting in streets, gardens and open spaces contributes to the character and appearance of the area. The mature gardens, trees and boundary hedges form an integral part of the character of the Gidea Park Conservation Area, along with property designs influenced by the Arts and Crafts movement and materials used. 7. The appeal site is a semi-detached property which has been extended and altered, however the property retains an influence of the Revival of Arts and Crafts details. 8. I understand that a previous approval for the appeal site allowed dormer windows to the rear1, however due to a change to the internal arrangements a roof light was inserted into the side elevation of the main roof. The Council dose not raise issue with the dormer windows shown on the plans submitted, I do not disagree. 9. Whilst the roof light is visible from public vantages points, I observed during my site visit that there are roof lights visible on other properties in the area, whilst this is not a common feature, they did not look incongruous nor affected the significance of the conservation area in general. The roof light at the appeal site is modest in size and does not compromise the contribution the property makes to the conservation area. 10. In the absence of harm to the conservation areas character and appearance, I conclude that the proposal has a neutral effect upon the significance of the heritage asset. 11. I conclude that the development would not harm the character and appearance of the Gidea Park Conservation Area. There is no conflict with Policy 28 of the Havering Local Plan 2016-2031 (2021) which amongst other things seek to achieve good design appropriate to the local context which conserve and enhance Conservation Areas. 12. There is no conflict with the Framework which seeks amongst other things to ensure developments are of good design appropriate and sympathetic to their surroundings and that the historic environment is protected. Conclusion 13. For the above reasons I conclude that this appeal should be allowed. 14. Conditions relating to standard time limit for commencement of development, plans to be adhered to are not relevant or necessary as the development is complete. 15. In the interest of privacy I have imposed a condition relating to obscure glazing and fixing closed the roof light on the side elevation of the main roof. 1 Application Reference: P0617.22 Appeal Decision APP/B5480/D/23/3317391 3 C Pipe INSPECTOR