Ground floor rear extension to extend kitchen, build out three gables on the ground floor and create a new first floor with 5 bedrooms and then create 2 rooms in the loft for a cinema and games room. Conversion of the garage to a gym and home office

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 8 July 2026 by P H Wallace BSc (Hons) DipMS MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date:15 September 2026 Appeal Ref: 6010456 37 Fawkham Avenue, Longfield, Kent DA3 7HS • 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 Gurdeep Shergill against the decision of the Dartford Borough Council. • The application Ref is DA/26/00049/FUL • The development proposed is described as ground floor rear extension to extend kitchen, build out three gables on the ground floor and create a new first floor with 5 bedrooms and then create 2 rooms in the loft for a cinema and games room. Conversion of the garage to a gym and home office . Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published on 17 August 2026. Both main parties were given an opportunity to comment on the implications of the revised Framework for the appeal, and I have taken their comments into account. I have determined the appeal having regard to the 2026 Framework. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider area. Reasons 4. The appeal property is a detached bungalow beneath a prominent hipped roof, with an attached garage extending to the eastern side boundary under a largely flat roof. The property lies on the north side of Fawkham Avenue (the Avenue) and is set modestly back from the road. It is within an area of relatively low density characterised by a varied mix of detached properties set within spacious plots, with mature frontage planting contributing positively to the character and appearance of the wider street frontage. 5. Some plots within the Avenue have been redeveloped with two and three storey dwellings of notable scale incorporating contemporary architectural features, including front-facing gables, asymmetrical forms and crown roofs. However, in many of these cases, the retention of landscaping, coupled with their set-back positions and clear separation from neighbouring properties, allows their scale and articulation to be absorbed within the established character of the area. Appeal Decision 6010456 2 6. Numbers 31 and 33 Fawkham Avenue (Nos 31 and 33), have a more open and therefore prominent presence than most others in the Avenue. However, they are not typical and represent a distinct local variation in character. 7. To the east of the appeal site is a two-storey detached dwelling (No. 39), positioned off the common boundary and occupying land at a lower level than the appeal property. Mature tree cover on its frontage provides partial screening in public views, reflecting the mature landscaping and screening evident elsewhere along the Avenue. 8. The proposal would comprise the remodelling of the existing bungalow to create a substantial three-storey dwelling. This would include a hipped roof incorporating a raised crown roof, and two two-storey front-facing gables one of which would extend close to the common boundary with No. 39. A third, smaller projecting glazed entrance gable would be positioned between them. The front gables would incorporate differing glazing treatments, while the principal hipped roof would adopt an asymmetrical profile. 9. The Council refers to the effect of the proposal on the host property. However, as the proposal would substantially subsume the existing bungalow within the resulting building, any effect on the host dwelling is inseparable from the impact of the development overall. I have therefore focused my assessment on the resulting building’s effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 10. The proposal would result in a building of large scale and mass. The relatively open frontage to the appeal site would make the increased scale of the proposed building particularly apparent in public views, giving it a notable visual presence. Elements of the proposal may not be uncharacteristic of those found locally, such as at 15, 25 and 31 Fawkham Avenue. However, their concentration within a single design on the proposal, in particular the variations in roof form, gable heights and fenestration, would result in the building having an odd appearance, which would detract from the prevailing character of the street scene. 11. The scale and bulk of the development would be further emphasised in its relationship with No. 39, where the proposal would extend to the common boundary with the adjoining built form. This, combined with its higher ground level relative to No. 39, would accentuate the height and bulk of the proposal. As such, the proposal would appear disproportionately large and cramped in its immediate surroundings. Although some screening is present, the mass of the proposal would still be readily appreciable from publicly obtainable views. As a result, the proposal would not sit comfortably within its plot or respond appropriately to the predominant character and appearance of Fawkham Avenue. 12. As a consequence, the proposal would appear unduly prominent within the street scene and would fail to integrate with the established character and appearance of the area. It would therefore conflict with Policies M1 and M10 of the Dartford Local Plan, adopted April 2024, which amongst other things seek development that respects, reinforces and enhances local character. The proposal would also conflict with Policy DP3 of the Framework which requires development proposals to respond to their context and integrate with and enhance their surroundings. 13. I have had regard to the appellant's personal circumstances, including the desire to provide a long-term family home close to an established family support network and the need for additional accommodation to meet the family's requirements. Whilst I Appeal Decision 6010456 3 understand those circumstances and the reasons for seeking the proposed development, they do not outweigh the harm that I have identified to the character and appearance of the area. Conclusion 14. As it would cause harm to the character and appearance of the area, I conclude the proposal would not comply with the development plan as a whole and would conflict with Policy DP3 of the Framework. There are no other considerations which indicate that the appeal should be determined otherwise. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. P H Wallace INSPECTOR