None

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 8 May 2025 by Lewis Condé BSc (Hons), MSc, MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 13 May 2025 Appeal Ref: D/6000102 Proposal: New roof over existing flat roof. Extension of existing dormer to the rear and 3 window dormers to the front at 209 Southend Arterial Road, Hornchurch, Havering RM11 2SF. Application Ref: P1233.24. Decision – The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters Reasons Issue – effect on the character and appearance of the host property and surrounding area 1. Dwellings in the surrounding area vary in scale and appearance, including through displaying diverse roof forms. Nevertheless, the proposed rear dormer, through combining with the site’s existing dormer, would be substantial in scale, particularly its length. As such, it would dominate the rear roof slope of the appeal property resulting in a highly unsympathetic addition. 2. Even in the context of a wide variety and style of dormers nearby, including to the host dwelling and the adjoining property, the appeal proposal would be of an excessive scale and bulk. Although the dormer’s size and design is unlikely to be appreciable from public vantage points, it would be apparent from neighbouring properties. Furthermore, irrespective of its degree of visibility, the scale and design of the proposed rear dormer remains inappropriate. 3. The proposed pitched-roof and front dormers would not result in any significant sense of imbalance between the pair of semi-detached bungalows that the appeal dwelling forms part of. This is due to previous works that have taken place to each property. Additionally, the three front dormers would be small in scale and well contained within the front roof slope. From my observations, comparable dormers were also present to the front of several nearby properties on the street, such that the proposed front dormers would not appear untoward. Meanwhile, the proposed pitched roof would visually improve the flat roof side extension to the appeal property. Nonetheless, this does not overcome my concern with the scale and design of the proposed rear dormer. 4. Overall, the proposed development would therefore cause harm to the character and appearance of the host property, with consequent harm to the surrounding Appeal Decision 6000102 2 area. It therefore conflicts with the relevant development plan policies cited in the Council’s first reason for refusal on its decision notice. Issue - Effect on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers of no. 207 Southend Arterial Road (no. 207), in respect of loss of outlook and overbearing impacts 5. The current flat roof extension to the appeal property sits tight to the boundary with no. 207, a two-storey dwelling that has previously been extended to the rear, and which also sits tight to the shared boundary. The proposal would introduce development in extremely close proximity to a window in the side elevation of the adjacent neighbouring dwelling. 6. From my observations on site, the size and nature of the relevant neighbouring window suggests it would serve a habitable room, whilst there is no robust evidence before me to indicate otherwise. Taking a precautionary approach, I have therefore treated it as such. 7. Given the scale and very close siting of the gable end of the proposed pitched roof to the neighbouring window, the appeal scheme would result in a significant loss of outlook and overbearing impacts to the habitable room, thereby harming the living conditions of the neighbouring residents of no.207. Accordingly, the proposal conflicts with Policy 7 of the Havering Local Plan (adopted 2021). Other Matters 8. A lack of objections from neighbouring residents is not a suitable reason to allow harmful development. Nor do the benefits to the appellant, such as, improved living accommodation justify the harm that would occur. Conclusion 9. The proposal is contrary to the development plan as a whole and no matters raised indicate a decision should be made otherwise. Lewis Condé INSPECTOR