27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 24 September 2021 by R C Shrimplin MA(Cantab) DipArch RIBA FRTPI FCIArb MCIL an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 16 November 2021 Appeal Reference: APP/Q5300/W/21/3270889 27 Amersham Avenue, Edmonton, London N18 1DU • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a failure to give notice within the prescribed period of a decision on an application for planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Larry Ashagbe against the decision of Enfield Council. • The application (reference 20/02778/HOU) is dated 1 September 2020. • The development proposed is described in the application form as “demolition of existing garage, erection of double storey side extension”. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the demolition of an existing garage and the erection of a double storey side extension, at 27 Amersham Avenue, Edmonton, London N18 1DU, in accordance with the terms of the application (reference 20/02778/HOU), subject to the conditions set out in the attached Schedule of Conditions. Main issue 2.

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Appeal Decision The main issue to be determined in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host building and its surroundings. Reasons 3. The appeal site is located in a closely built up residential area of Edmonton, in North London, that is characterised by semi-detached and terraced houses, dating from the earlier part of the twentieth century, in a roughly rectangular street pattern. There is some on-street parking pressure in the area. Plot sizes and house styles vary but houses in the area are generally conventional in appearance, often with alterations and adaptations that have been carried out over the years. Indeed, building works were being undertaken at the time of the site visit, to construct a new house on land adjoining the appeal site, on the Hardinge Road frontage. 4. Number 27 Amersham Avenue is one of a pair of semi-detached houses at the junction of Amersham Avenue and Hardinge Road. It has a very small back garden area but a larger front garden, as a result of the geometry of the corner plot. The house itself has rendered external walls under a main hipped roof, http://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision: APP/Q5300/W/21/3270889 which it shares with the neighbouring property at number 29. The house currently incorporates a single storey side extension and there is a separate garage adjacent to the front boundary on Hardinge Road. 5. It is now proposed to demolish the garage and to replace the existing side extension with a much larger two-storey extension. 6. Planning policies are aimed at achieving good standards of architectural design. Development Plan Policies in the ‘Enfield Plan Core Strategy 2010-2025’ (adopted in November 2010) and the ‘Improving Enfield Development Management Document’ (adopted in November 2014) are especially important. Core Strategy Policy CP30 and Development Management Document Policies DMD6, DMD8, DMD14 and DMD37 all have a particular relevance to design considerations. 7. Similarly, policies in ‘The London Plan’ and national planning policies (as set out in the ‘National Planning Policy Framework’) also continue to emphasise the importance of achieving good design.

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Appeal Decision They make it plain that new development is to be well designed and sympathetic to its surroundings and the recent revisions to the ‘National Planning Policy Framework’) do not fundamentally affect these basic planning principles in the context of this appeal. 8. In this case, the proposed extension would be in harmony with the host building, having been designed with hipped roofs and rendered walls to replicate the style of the existing house but in a way that would identify the extension as a subservient element in the completed design. It would be constructed close to the neighbour’s boundary but would not unduly affect the neighbour’s quality of life (for example by overshadowing). 9. The retained garden space would be adequate for the finished house and sufficient land would be retained for off-street parking, notwithstanding the loss of the garage. A landscaping scheme would need to be provided, however, to ensure that a good environmental standard would be achieved overall. 10. Evidently, the appeal site lies within an established urban area, which is “sustainable” in planning terms.

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Appeal Decision It would amount to a modest extension to the existing dwelling but it would provide useful additional space and would, thereby, add to the stock of residential accommodation in the locality, albeit in a very limited way. I have concluded that the project would not be in conflict with the national legislation or the Development Plan, in principle, and that it is acceptable in planning terms. 11. I note that the Officer’s Report on the planning application recommended that planning permission should be granted, although the report appears to be undated itself (while recording the due date for the decision) and, surprisingly, was provided much later in the appeal process. 12. For the reasons given above, I am convinced that the scheme before me can properly be permitted and, although I have considered all the matters that have been raised in the representations, I have found nothing to cause me to alter my decision. 2

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision: APP/Q5300/W/21/3270889 13. I have, however, also considered the need for conditions and I have concluded that standard conditions are necessary, to define the planning permission and to ensure that quality is maintained. 14. Additional conditions have been imposed, as indicated in the belated Officer’s Report on the planning application. These include conditions to require obscured glazing to be installed where windows would otherwise intrude on neighbours’ privacy, and to require the preparation of a suitable landscaping scheme, taking account of the removal of the garage. On the other hand, I am not persuaded that an “incidental use” condition is necessary in this case.

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Roger C Shrimplin INSPECTOR 3

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Roger C Shrimplin INSPECTOR 3 Appeal Decision: APP/Q5300/W/21/3270889 SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this decision. 2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings: drawing number 1414_P01 (Site Location Plan); drawing number 1414_P02 (Plans as Existing); drawing number 1414_P03 (Elevations as Existing); drawing number 1414_P04 revision C (Plans as Proposed); drawing number 1414_P05 revision D (Elevations as Proposed); drawing number 1414_P06 revision B (Block Plan); 3. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. 4. The first-floor rear (north-west) window of the extension hereby permitted, except for that part of the window which is at least 1.7 metres above finished floor level in the room in which the window is installed, shall be glazed in obscured glass and shall also be fixed shut.

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Roger C Shrimplin Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no further modifications to this window shall be made and no windows, doors or openings of any kind shall be inserted in the elevations of the building without the express written approval of the local planning authority. 5. Prior to first occupation of the extension hereby permitted, full details of both hard and soft landscape works for the site shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the implementation programme approved by the local planning authority. Any trees or plants which within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the local planning authority gives written consent to any variation. 6.

27 Amersham Avenue, LONDON, N18 1DU — London Borough of Enfield — Roger C Shrimplin Notwithstanding the landscaping condition that has been imposed (above), prior to first occupation of the extension hereby permitted, the existing garage on the site (which is shown on the drawings to be demolished) shall have been demolished and all debris arising shall have been removed from the site. 4