Installation of sliding doors

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 21 December 2023 by Victor Callister BA(Hons) PGC(Oxon) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 17 January 2024. Appeal Ref: APP/N5660/D/23/3330196 34 Monkton Street, Lambeth, London SE11 4TX • 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 Omar and Qiyin Quraishi against the decision of the London Borough of Lambeth Council. • The application Ref 23/02068/FUL, dated 28 June 2023, was refused by notice dated 10 August 2023. • The development proposed is the installation of sliding doors. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the installation of sliding doors at 34 Monkton Street, Lambeth, London SE11 4TX in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 23/02068/FUL, dated 28 June 2023, 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 development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: A201 Rev A, A204 Rev C, A205 Rev C, 208 Rev C, A211 Rev C Procedural Matters 2. Subsequent to the decision made by the Council on the planning application to which this appeal relates, the National Planning Policy Framework has been revised. Consequently, I have therefore made my decision with regard to the National Planning Framework (December 2023) (the Framework). Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect on the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and that of the Walcot Conservation Area (the CA) Reasons 4. The appeal dwelling is a three storey end of terrace house with basement. The terrace of which it forms part is a relatively recent development of traditionally formed and detailed terraced houses, which contextually respond in their design to the surrounding original terraced streets, resulting in a cohesive streetscape. Appeal Decision APP/N5660/D/23/3330196 2 5. The South-Western boundary of the CA runs down the middle of this part of Monkton Street and the appeal dwelling faces onto this boundary. The significance of the CA rests in the cohesive townscape resulting from the development of 19th Century squares and streets of houses of unpretentious and disciplined design. 6. The terrace of which the appeal dwelling forms part, is noted in the Walcot Conservation Area Character Appraisal as making a positive contribution to the significance of the CA, through its use of design respecting historical context. In line with the duty imposed on me by section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, I have given considerable importance and weight to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. 7. The proposal for sliding doors is an addition to alterations already approved under a previous planning permission1, but that have not been commenced. It does not appear to me that the appeal proposal is dependent on the implementation of this previous permission, and I have, therefore, considered the appeal proposal on this basis. 8. The proposed sliding doors would reach across most of the rear ground floor elevation, facing onto a small rear garden with a rear basement access and light well. The proposed doors would be in full height glazing, set within an aluminium box frame, which would be set in from the edge of the rear elevation. 9. The existing rear elevation of the appeal dwelling and the other houses in the terrace are intended to reflect the 19th Century architectural expression of the original houses in the wider CA. Whilst the appeal dwelling does reflect this established local character and appearance from a distance, the architectural detailing is not thoroughgoing in its execution to stand close scrutiny. 10. Whilst the upper levels of the rear elevation of the appeal dwelling and the terrace are visible from the rear of buildings on St. Mary’s Wall, a tall boundary wall at the rear of the properties in the terrace fully obscures the rear ground floor from view. From my site visit it was evident that that this wall and tall boundary fences to the rear of properties in the terrace, including the appeal dwelling, result in the ground floor rear of the appeal dwelling being entirely screened from view, both public and private. 11. As such, the proposed sliding doors would not be visible from either public or private viewpoints and the alteration to insert sliding doors at rear ground floor level would follow a common approach, where there is no wider views or effect on character or appearance. Therefore, the proposal would not result in any significant harm to the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and would preserve the character and appearance of the CA, resulting in no harm to its significance. 12. For these reasons the proposal as a whole would accord with Policies Q5, Q11 and Q22 of the Lambeth Local Plan (2021), Policies D3 and HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and sections 12 and 16 of the Framework. These collectively seek development that is of high design quality, sympathetic to the age and 1 Planning Ref:22/04478/FUL Appeal Decision APP/N5660/D/23/3330196 3 character of the host building, respects local distinctiveness existing views and preserves or enhances the appearance or character of conservation areas. Conditions 13. Along with the standard condition on the timing of implementation, to ensure design quality I have also required compliance with approved drawings. I have not however included a suggested condition by the Council relating to matching materials, as the approved drawings specify the materials proposed. Conclusion 14. The appeal is allowed. Victor Callister INSPECTOR