Roof extension involving partial hip to gable with rear dormer windows and 2no. front facing rooflights

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 26 November 2024 by A Tucker BA (Hons) IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 05 December 2024 Appeal Ref: 6000011 9 Beulah Close, Edgware HA8 8SP • 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 Meir Frommer against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Barnet. • The application Ref is 24/3097/HSE. • The development proposed is roof extension involving partial hip to gable with rear dormer windows and 2no. front facing rooflights. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for roof extension involving partial hip to gable with rear dormer windows and 2no. front facing rooflights, at 9 Beulah Close, Edgware HA8 8SP in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/3097/HSE, and subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: E00, E01, E02, E03, E04, E05, E06, P01, P02, P03, P04, P05, P06, and P07. 3) The materials to be used in the external surfaces shall match those used in the existing building. Preliminary Matters 2. I have used the description of development suggested by the Council and agreed by the appellant as it more accurately describes the proposal than the description entered on the application form. 3. The Council is in the process of reviewing its Local Plan. The review is at an advanced stage; however, its policies will be of limited weight in the context of the main issue of the appeal. Main Issue 4. The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 5. The appeal building is one of a semi-detached pair of dwellings that stand at the end of a cul-de-sac. The area is characterised by similar pairs of mid-20th Appeal Decision 6000011 2 century dwellings that face broad tree lined streets, giving the area a consistent and spacious character. 6. The appeal building is one half of a semi-detached pair, that stand prominently at the end of the road, and terminate the view along the cul-de-sac. They have both been significantly extended to the sides, and the side extensions are splayed out to follow the shape of the plots. Despite this, a sense of their original form is retained; in part by the main ridge that spans across the two dwellings, but also by the prominent road facing wings. These wings are a distinctive feature of the dwellings on the road. They extend forward a considerable distance from the main parts of each dwelling, and provide a pleasant pattern of road facing gables and hips that gives the cul-de-sac a consistent character. 7. The proposal would see the main ridge extended to one side. This would mean that it would be offset. However, at my visit I saw that this ridge is very much secondary to the prominent road facing gables. These features would remain and would be sufficient to retain a sense of the scale and design of the original pair of dwellings, and to safeguard the character and appearance of the road. 8. A large roof extension would be formed at the rear, to provide additional accommodation. This would significantly exceed the guidelines set out in the Council’s design guide1. However, from the rear the dwelling has already been significantly extended, effectively doubling its width. The rear garden is large and enclosed, and when facing out it is possible to see many similarly sized roof extensions to the rear of other properties. It would thus not appear out of place and would not overwhelm the form of the existing dwelling given the size of the existing extensions. 9. In summary, the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the area. It would accord with Policy DM01 of the Development Management Policies Development Plan Document September 2012 and Policy CS5 of the Core Strategy Development Plan Document September 2012. Together these Policies seek to ensure that development proposals are well designed to preserve or enhance local character. Conditions 10. I have had regard to the conditions suggested by the Council. I have considered these against the tests in the National Planning Policy Framework and the advice in the Planning Practice Guidance. I have imposed a condition to specify the approved plans to give certainty, and a materials condition to ensure that the proposal does not harm the character or appearance of the area. Conclusion 11. For the reasons above, the appeal should be allowed. A Tucker INSPECTOR 1 Barnet Borough Council Local Plan Supplementary Planning Document: Residential Design Guidance October 2016