Roof extension involving raising of the ridge height, hip to gable with rear dormer window and 2no. front facing rooflights

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 9 April 2025 by M Aqbal BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 02 June 2025 Appeal Ref: 6000088 85 Kings Drive, Barnet, Edgware HA8 8EG • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Ziyauddin Azam against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Barnet. • The application Ref is 24/3728/HSE. • The development proposed is roof extension involving raising of the ridge height, hip to gable with rear dormer window and 2no. front facing rooflights. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matter 2. For the purposes of my Decision and because this better describes the proposal, I have used the Council’s description of the proposed development, as set out in its decision. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 4. The appeal property comprises an end terrace dwelling within a small terrace of dwellings. Most notably, the roof form of this terrace is hipped at each end and connected with a consistent ridge line. This arrangement gives the roofscape of this terrace a uniform ridge line and symmetrical design. There are also other terraces within Kings Drive with similar roof forms. As such, the appeal property and its roof form contribute to a cohesive roofscape and street scene. 5. The proposed alterations and extensions are intended to provide an enlarged and more functional internal living space by converting the existing loft into a habitable living area. The main elements of the proposal include a hip to gable extension and rear dormer extension. Moreover, to allow for the required floor to ceiling height, the ridge of the existing roof would also need to be raised. 6. Notwithstanding the use of high quality matching materials, the proposed extensions and alterations, in particular the increase in ridge height, would appreciably extend and alter the roof of the appeal property. This would result in an asymmetrical roof form for the wider terrace and an erosion of its existing uniform and balanced appearance. Appeal Decision 6000088 2 7. As such, the proposal would be an incongruous addition to the roofscape and street scene along Kings Drive. This would harm the character and appearance of the appeal property and area. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), policies CS1 and CS5 of the Barnet Core Strategy (2012) and policy DM01 of the Barnet Development Management Policies (2012). Together, these policies aim to secure high quality design in new developments that preserve or enhance local character. Other Matters 8. The appellant has submitted some information in respect of pending and approved planning applications within the borough, which relate to alterations to the roofs of properties. Nevertheless, I have insufficient information in respect of these which have been approved to draw any meaningful comparisons and conclusions. 9. The appellant asserts that parts of the proposal may be undertaken as permitted development. Even so, this is not a matter for me to determine in the context of an appeal made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The scheme before me relates to the proposal in its entirety and I have determined the appeal on this basis. Conclusion 10. For the above reasons, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed M Aqbal INSPECTOR