Described on the planning application form as ‘Roof alterations, loft conversion with new rear dormer and 3no. front roof windows

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 21 July 2025 by Alison Fish BA (Hons) Dip TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 July 2025 Appeal Ref: 6000241 5 Manorbrook, Blackheath, Greenwich SE3 9AW • 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 and Mrs Ainley against the decision of the Council of the Royal London Borough of Greenwich. • The application Ref is 24/3566/HD. • The development proposed is described on the planning application form as ‘Roof alterations, loft conversion with new rear dormer and 3no. front roof windows’. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for roof alterations, loft conversion with new rear dormer and 3no. front roof windows at 5 Manorbrook, Blackheath, Greenwich SE3 9AW in accordance with the terms of application Ref 24/3566/HD, and the plans submitted with it, 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 drawing numbers: 24/5/4 Proposed Ground and First Floor Plans; 24/5/5 Proposed Second Floor Plan; 24/5/6 Proposed Front and Side Elevations; 24/5/7 Proposed Side and Rear Elevations; 24/5/8 Proposed Section; 24/5/9 Proposed Roof Plan; 24/5/10 Proposed Site Plan; Location Plan dated 03 November 2024 and undated Block Plan. Main Issue 2. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area including the Blackheath Park Conservation Area (CA). Reasons 3. The CA is predominantly residential with a wide range of housing from grand Georgian and Victorian villas and small mansions with grounds to mid twentieth century Span developments of flats. Located on wide, tree lined avenues with broad soft verges, the significance of the CA comes from the exceptional variety and richness of housing types which has evolved over the past 200 years and its overall verdant green character. 4. The appeal property is located within the Cator Estate South character area and is part of a small twentieth century enclave of housing which although not overtly discordant or harmful to the character of the area, is nonetheless fairly Appeal Decision 6000241 2 unremarkable. Its significance comes from the contribution it and the group of houses makes to the overall diversity of housing in the CA. 5. The appeal property is the only detached property within the small development of otherwise semi-detached properties. Its ridgeline also sits lower than the neighbouring property. As a result, the minor alteration to the pitch of the roof leading to an increase in the height of the ridge would not appear out of keeping with the neighbouring semi-detached pair. 6. The proposed dormer to the rear would cover a large area of the rear roof slope. However, it would be set down from the main ridge, set well in from the sides of the roof and the up from the eaves line. Although it would be a large addition to the roof, the close proximity of the neighbouring dwelling and extent of established planting in the area means that it would only be partially visible in the gaps immediately to the side of the appeal property. The fenestration, although not wholly aligned with the windows of the existing dwelling below, would not appear so discordant to be harmful. For these reasons, it would not appear as an overwhelming or incongruous addition to the appeal dwelling. 7. The provision of a hipped roof over the existing first floor flat roof extension would be similar to that on the neighbouring property. It would respect the scale and character of the host dwelling and be a harmonious addition, even with the addition of the dormer window to the roof. 8. Taken together, the appeal proposal would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the host dwelling or the contribution that the group of housing makes to the significance of the CA. The proposed development would have a neutral effect on the character and appearance of the CA and preserve its significance. 9. The proposal therefore accords with Policies D3 and HC1 of The London Plan adopted March 2021, and Policies DH1, DH(a) and DH(h) of the Royal Greenwich Local Plan Core Strategy with Detailed Policies adopted July 2014. Together these seek to ensure that, amongst other things, developments respond positively to distinctive local character, are of an appropriate scale, height and mass and that the CA is conserved and enhanced in a manner appropriate to its significance. Conditions 10. In addition to the standard time condition, it is necessary to specify the approved plans in the interests of certainty. The Council have suggested a condition to ensure that the proposed rooflights sit flush with the roof. However given my findings regarding the dwelling’s contribution to the significance of the CA, this is not necessary. Conclusion 11. The proposed development would adhere to the development plan and there are no material considerations that outweigh this finding. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Alison Fish INSPECTOR