First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA
London Borough of Croydon — appeal dismissed
- Outcome
- Dismissed
- Decision date
- 13 November 2023
- Authority
- London Borough of Croydon
- Inspector
- Williams K
- Procedure
- Written Representations
- Casework type
- Planning Appeal
- Type detail
- Planning Appeals - Full
- Development type
- Other minor developments
- Appellant
- - C Taylor & L Kimpton
- LPA reference
- 22/01336/FUL
- ONS LPA code
- E09000008
- Jurisdiction
- Transferred
- Link status
- Not Linked
- Start date
- 15 August 2023
Summary AI
The appeal for a loft conversion in a terraced property was dismissed due to the proposed roof extensions' potential harm to the character and appearance of the host building and the surrounding area.
PDF text
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 23 October 2023 by K Williams MTCP (Hons) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 13 November 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/L5240/W/22/3312828 First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Croydon, Thornton Heath, CR7 8NA • 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 C. Taylor and L. Kimpton against the decision of the Council of the Council of the London Borough of Croydon. • The application Ref 22/01336/FUL, dated 29 March 2022, was refused by notice dated 22 August 2022. • The development is a proposed loft conversion. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The description of development in the heading above has been taken from the planning application form. However, in Part E of the appeal form it is stated that the description of development has not changed but, nevertheless, a different wording has been entered. Neither of the main parties has provided written confirmation that a revised description of development has been agreed. Accordingly, I have used the one given on the original application. Main Issue 3.
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision The main issue is the effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and wider area. Reasons 4. The appeal site comprises a middle two-storey terraced property which has been converted into flats. Located within a predominantly residential area, there are a variety of substantial traditional terraced properties alongside more modest newer semi-detached dwellings. The appeal terrace has a rear 2-storey outrigger, which abuts the outrigger to the adjoining property at No 47 Norwich Road. 5. The existing appeal building, including the outrigger has a simple roof. The proposed development would involve the construction of a large dormer window on the main rear roof slope. It would also include a further dormer extension on the rear outrigger. The dormer windows would facilitate the reordering of the first floor creating three bedroom accommodation over two floors. 6. The proposed dormer to the rear of the main roof would be large, with no significant set back from either the ridge or the eaves of the host dwelling. It would extend across much of the width of the main roof with only a slight set- https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L5240/W/22/3312828 in from the side elevation to the other adjoining property at No 43 Norwich Road. Whilst the part of the dormer above the outrigger would be lower than the dormer on the main roof, it would extend nearly half way across it and would project above its existing ridge line and the raised parapet and coping between it and No 47. Due to the combined size, length, and position of the proposal on the outrigger, only a small proportion of the existing roof plane would remain. As a result, the appeal proposal overall would be disproportionate and not appear subservient to the host building. 7. Although I observed a roof extension and balcony on a nearby detached property on the opposing side of the road, and traditional rear dormer windows on properties opposite the rear of the appeal site, these are relatively isolated examples. Large flat roof dormer windows do not characterise the immediate area. In particular as the roof plane on the adjacent properties remain unaltered, the appeal proposal would appear particularly discordant as it would disrupt the appearance of the small row of terraces. 8.
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision There would be some views of the proposal from the wider area, furthermore the proposals would also be visible from neighbouring properties and gardens. Unlike the majority of other terraces on the street, the side elevation of the neighbouring No 47 is clearly visible from Norwich Road. That property is adjacent to space which marks the beginning of development facing Norwich Road, separating the site from the associated land at the rear of the buildings which front St Pauls Road. Although the appeal property is not the end terrace, views of the proposed roof dormers would be obtainable due to the gap between the side elevation of No 47 and the properties facing St Pauls Road and because the proposed dormer extensions would project above the adjoining outrigger. 9. Due to the above, the appeal proposal differs from the example at No 12 Norwich Road, as it has a more spacious setting. In any event, the fact that similar dormers already exist in the surrounding area is not in itself a reason to allow unacceptable development. Although these may have been constructed using Permitted Development Rights, I have not been provided with a clearly defined fallback position in relation to all the parameters for this proposal.
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision In any event, the property is a flat and would not benefit from these rights. I have determined the appeal on the individual merits of the case, having regard to the character and appearance of the host property, the surrounding area and the prominence of the proposed roof extensions. 10. Consequently, the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the host building and the area. The appeal proposal would not complement the locality in terms of scale, siting, and design and thus conflicts with Croydon Local Plan (2018) Policy DM10. The proposal would also conflict with Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021). Combined and insofar as they are relevant to the appeal these seek to ensure that development, whilst optimising the capacity of sites, provides a high quality built environment which is sympathetic to local context. Other Matters 11. It is noted the appellants have tried to contact the council. However, whether the appellants could contact the Council or not, is not a matter to which I can attach any weight in making this decision. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/L5240/W/22/3312828 Conclusion 12. For the reasons given above, the proposal would not accord with the development plan taken as a whole. Taking into account all other relevant matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
First Floor Flat, 45 Norwich Road, Thorton Heath, CR7 8NA — London Borough of Croydon — K Williams INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3
Main issues and findings
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶6
The proposed dormer windows would facilitate the reordering of the first floor creating three bedroom accommodation over two floors, but the dormers would be large and extend across much of the width of the main roof, causing harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and wider area.
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶7
The proposed dormer windows would disrupt the appearance of the small row of terraces, as they would be visible from the wider area and neighbouring properties and gardens, and would be particularly discordant due to the remaining unaltered roof planes of the adjacent properties.
Character and appearance Against appellant ¶10
The proposal would harm the character and appearance of the host building and the area, as it would not complement the locality in terms of scale, siting, and design.
Policies relied on
| Reference | Weight |
|---|---|
| Croydon Local Plan (2018) Policy DM10 |
Determinative |
| London Plan (2021) Policy D3 |
Determinative |
Site constraints from the Casework Database
Source
Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 13 November 2023 under the Open Government Licence.