81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 15 June 2021 by J Ayres BA Hons, Solicitor an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 8th July 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/L5240/W/21/3267516 81 Court Avenue, Coulsdon CR5 1HJ • 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 Mr R Vince against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Croydon. • The application Ref 20/03323/FUL, dated 24 July 2020, was refused by notice dated 26 November 2020. • The development proposed is Demolition of garage and erection of two-storey attached dwelling. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issues 2. The main issues are the effect of the proposal on (i) the character and appearance of the area; and (ii) highway safety. Reasons Character and appearance 3. The appeal site is located at the corner of Court Avenue and Keston Avenue. It is a prominent element of the street scene due to the slight change in land levels and its corner location, providing the focal point of entry to Court Avenue.

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Its mock Tudor, semi-detached style reflects the strong element of uniformity that continues along Court Avenue, where dwellings are largely unaltered, demonstrating a dominant design and form along the length of the road. 4. The proposal would destroy the symmetry that is created through the rhythm of semi-detached dwellings at this point of Court Avenue by introducing a small terrace. Whilst it would only be one additional house the inclusion of a terrace, which would result in a cramped and subdivided plot, would be discordant in respect of its relationship with the constant rhythm of dwellings along the road, and be an alien addition to this prominent corner site. As a result, the proposal would be harmful to the character of the immediate and wider area. 5. Planning permission has been previously granted for a two-storey side extension including a dormer feature and single storey rear extension.1 In 1 Ref 20/01892/HSE https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L5240/W/21/3267516 respect of scale the proposal is similar to the extant planning permission. However, the extant permission would appear as a clearly subservient addition to the host dwelling in respect of its detailing which would include a garage door on the front elevation. Contrary to this the proposal before me would clearly introduce a new front façade to the additional built form, which would include a main entrance, and subdivision of the front garden of the site. This would result in the site being experienced as a terrace of properties which would be harmful to the character as detailed above. Whilst I acknowledge that there is a fallback position available to the appellant, I consider that the fallback would not be as harmful and is therefore preferable to the appeal scheme. 6. There are other examples of development similar to the appeal scheme being granted in the area. However, these examples are not within Court Avenue where the design and homogeneity of the built form is an intrinsic element of the character of the area. As such I do not consider that permitting similar schemes elsewhere would justify this scheme, which I have determined on its own merits. 7.

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision I find that the proposal would result in harm to the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore conflict with Policies SP4.1 and DM10 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) which require new development to be of a high- quality design which enhances and respects local character. It would conflict with the guidance in the Suburban Design Guide (2019) which advises that the sense of a place that defines its character should be enhanced through development. Highway safety 8. The property currently has a vehicular access and parking adjacent to the boundary with Keston Avenue which would be retained for the proposed house, a new vehicular access and parking space is proposed for the existing house. 9. The proposed vehicular access/parking space would be adjacent to the boundary with no. 79 Court Avenue. Court Avenue is not a classified road, it is relatively wide and has a 20 mile per hour speed limit. It is clear that at present vehicles manoeuvre within the highway as the properties along Court Avenue do not have space within the respective sites for turning such to allow an exit in forward gear. However, there is a bollard on the pavement outside the site and a lamppost.

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision In order to access the highway it would be necessary for any vehicle to be able to clear these obstructions in manoeuvring into and out of the driveway. On the basis of the evidence it has not been demonstrated that this would be achievable. 10. I note that the highway authority did not comment on the application. However I consider that upon considering the evidence and the physical layout of the street and associated furniture that the scheme does not identify safe access and egress for future occupiers. 11. Accordingly, I find that the proposal as submitted would not provide a safe access for the development. It would therefore conflict with Policies SP8, DM29 and DM30 of the Croydon Local Plan (2018) which collectively and amongst other things seek to permit development where it would not have a detrimental impact on highway safety. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L5240/W/21/3267516 Planning Balance and Conclusion 12. I have found that the proposal would conflict with the development plan when taken as a whole. Whilst a new dwelling would make a very modest contribution to the supply of housing in the area, I do not consider that this outweighs the harm that has been identified. 13. Accordingly, for the reasons above I conclude that the appeal is dismissed.

81 Court Avenue, COULSDON, Surrey, CR5 1HJ — London Borough of Croydon — J Ayres INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3