Case 3335976

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL

London Borough of Hillingdon — appeal allowed

Outcome
Allowed
Decision date
1 August 2024
Authority
London Borough of Hillingdon
Inspector
De Freitas Terceiro P
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Development type
Minor Dwellings
Appellant
Mr Chris Barrett
LPA reference
25767/APP/2023/2805
ONS LPA code
E09000017
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
3 April 2024

Summary AI

The appeal for the demolition of an existing dwelling and the erection of two 5-bed semi-detached dwellings at 72 Harefield Road was allowed. The Inspector found that the proposal would not detract from the character of the area and would comply with policies such as Policies D3 and D4 of the London Plan 2021 and Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 18 June 2024 by P Terceiro BSc MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 1st August 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/R5510/W/23/3335976 72 Harefield Road, Uxbridge, Hillingdon UB8 1PL • 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 Barrett against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Hillingdon. • The application Ref is 25767/APP/2023/2805. • The development proposed is the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of building to provide 2 x 5-bed semi-detached dwellings with associated parking and amenity space. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of building to provide 2 x 5-bed semi-detached dwellings with associated parking and amenity space at 72 Harefield Road, Uxbridge, Hillingdon UB8 1PL in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25767/APP/2023/2805, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 3.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Harefield Road comprises properties of various ages, scales, and designs. Whilst most buildings are two-storey, the wider streetscape also includes four- storey buildings, such as the properties immediately to the north of the site, and a three-storey apartment block to the south. 4. The site is a spacious plot that slopes steeply up towards the rear and contains a somewhat dilapidated two storey detached dwelling. The dwelling is set back from the highway and its front garden contains trees and other vegetation which also extends along the sides of the property. The site is situated in a particularly verdant part of the road, following a line of trees, and the dwelling’s modest scale, together with the front garden and spacing between buildings on either side, makes an important contribution towards the leafy character of this part of the road. 5. The proposed development would replace the modest house by a four-storey pair of semi-detached dwellings of a greater scale. However, the proposal would have reasonable gaps to the side plot boundaries and to the adjacent buildings.

Page 1 · Chunk 2 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Despite being wider than the existing dwelling, the proposal would nonetheless provide views towards the retained greenery within the site, https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 1 · Chunk 3 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Despite being wider than the existing dwelling, the proposal would nonetheless provide views towards the retained greenery within the site, https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 4 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/23/3335976 therefore maintaining an acceptable relief from built form on this part of the road. Further, the width of the pair of semis would be similar to that of the buildings to the north, so it would respect the rhythm of buildings and spaces in the street scene. 6. The proposal’s height would be lower than the adjacent property to the north and similar to the flats to the south, thereby successfully managing the transition between both neighbouring properties. 7. Even though the dwellings would be bulkier and taller than other pairs of semi- detached properties within the road, the streetscape is tolerable to new design due to its varied nature and lack of homogeneity in style. As such, the proposal would sit comfortably within its receiving context. 8. I understand that this proposal follows previous planning applications which were refused by the Council and subsequently dismissed at appeal. Nevertheless, for the above reasons, I find that the proposal would not detract from the character of the area in its own terms. 9.

Page 2 · Chunk 5 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision In light of the above, the proposal would accord with Policies D3 and D4 of the London Plan 2021, Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies (2012) and Policies DMHB 11, and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Amongst other aspects, these policies support development that makes the best use of land, is well integrated with the surrounding area and is accessible. Further, the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which supports development that is sympathetic to local character. Other Matters 10. Third parties have raised concerns that the proposal would disrupt the community and may be used by multiple occupancy in the future. However, there is no evidence before me to indicate that this would be the case. Similarly, I have not been provided with compelling evidence to demonstrate that the proposal would harm biodiversity, put undue pressure on public services and strain on infrastructure. 11. I note the comments of neighbouring residents regarding highway safety.

Page 2 · Chunk 6 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision The proposal would provide one additional dwelling within the site, so the uplift in vehicular movements during peak times would be limited. There are several vehicular crossings along Harefield Road, so the reintroduction of the existing carriageway crossing, together with a second provision, would be acceptable. In order to maintain satisfactory sight-lines at the entrance points for vehicles and pedestrians, the appropriate height of the front boundary wall could be secured by condition. Given the site’s low public transport access level rate, the number of parking spaces would be acceptable, as it would assist in reducing the potential for on-street parking. 12. Although the proposed scheme would increase the number of residential properties on site the uplift would be limited. So, it is unlikely that the proposal would result in additional noise and disturbance levels over and above what would be expected in this residential area. Given the relationship with the adjoining properties it is unlikely that the proposal would give rise to a significant loss of light. Privacy screens would be installed on the balconies / https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Page 3 · Chunk 7 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/23/3335976 roof terraces, thereby ensuring that the privacy of the residents within the adjoining properties would be maintained to an acceptable standard. Conditions 13. I have considered the Council’s suggested planning conditions in light of the Framework and Planning Practice Guidance (PPG). I have amended these where necessary for clarity. 14. In addition to the standard time limit condition, I have attached a condition to define the permitted drawings to provide certainty. 15. I have imposed conditions requiring the submission of material samples, finished floor levels, details of soft landscaping and details of hard landscaping in order to protect the character and appearance of the area and the living conditions of the nearest neighbours. In the interests of highway safety and to promote sustainable travelling, the provision of details regarding cycle storage facilities and car parking layout is also necessary. Conditions relating the development’s level of accessibility and adaptability are required to ensure that the proposal achieves an inclusive design. 16.

Page 3 · Chunk 8 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision A condition requiring a Construction Management Plan is necessary to ensure highway safety and efficient traffic flow, to protect the environment and to minimise disturbance to local residents during construction. To ensure a sustainable water management, a condition requiring sustainable drainage systems details and methods to minimise the use of potable water is necessary. 17. A number of these conditions relate to pre-commencement activities. In each case, the requirement is fundamental to make the scheme acceptable in planning terms. 18. Bearing in mind the PPG’s advice that the blanket removal of freedoms to carry out small scale domestic alterations that would otherwise not require an application for planning permission are unlikely to meet the tests of reasonableness and necessity, I have not been provided with sufficient evidence as to why it would be reasonable or necessary to restrict several classes of permitted development rights. Therefore, I have not imposed the suggested condition to this effect. Conclusion 19. The proposal would comply with the development plan as a whole and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it.

Page 3 · Chunk 9 Appeal Decision

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — Appeal Decision For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.

Page 3 · Chunk 10 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Page 3 · Chunk 11 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Page 4 · Chunk 12 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/23/3335976 Schedule of 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 the following plans: Location Plan; 23_76_01 Rev A; 23_76_02 Rev A; 23_76_03 Rev A; 23_76_04 Rev A; 23_76_05; 23_76_06 Rev B and 23_76_07. 3) No development shall take place above slab level until details of all materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted, including details of balconies and privacy screens, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details should include information relating to make, product/type, colour and photographs/images. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such. 4) No development shall take place until plans of the site showing the existing and proposed ground levels and the proposed finished floor levels of the development hereby approved have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such levels shall be shown in relation to a fixed and know datum point.

Page 4 · Chunk 13 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 5) Notwithstanding any of the approved plans, no development shall take place until a landscape scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include: 1. Details of Soft Landscaping: 1.a Existing trees to be retained; 1.b Tree Protection Plan; 1.c Planting plans (at not less than a scale of 1:100); 1.d Written specification of planting and cultivation works to be undertaken; 1.d Schedule of plants giving species, plant sizes, and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate. 2. Details of Hard Landscaping: 2.a Refuse Storage area (including an accessible location for waste to be collected by the councils refuse collection services); 2.b Cycle Storage facilities (2 x secure and enclosed cycle storage units must be provided for each dwelling); 2.c Means of enclosure/boundary treatments; 2.d Car Parking Layout (showing the provision of 1 x active and 1 x passive Ev charging point per dwelling and a total of 3 parking spaces including the removal of parking space demarked as 2 closest to the unit on Plan No.

Page 4 · Chunk 14 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro 23_76_06 Rev B); 2.e Hard Surfacing Materials; 2.f External Lighting; 2.g Other structures (such as play equipment and furniture). 3. Schedule for Implementation. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Page 4 · Chunk 15 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro 23_76_06 Rev B); 2.e Hard Surfacing Materials; 2.f External Lighting; 2.g Other structures (such as play equipment and furniture). 3. Schedule for Implementation. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Page 5 · Chunk 16 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/23/3335976 4. Other: 4.a Existing and proposed functional services above and below ground. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the agreed schedule for implementation and maintained in strict accordance with the approved details. 6) Prior to any works on site above damp proof course level, details of step free access via all points of entry and exit to the development hereby approved shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted and thereafter retained as such. 7) The proposed dwellings hereby approved shall be constructed to meet the standards for a Category 2 M4(2) dwelling, as set out in the Approved Document M to the Building Regulations (2010) 2015, and all such provisions shall remain in place for the life of the building. 8) No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

Page 5 · Chunk 17 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro The statement shall provide for: (i) The phasing of development works; (ii) The hours during which development works will occur. (iii) A programme to demonstrate that the most valuable or potentially contaminating materials and fittings can be removed safely and intact for later re-use or processing. (iv) Measures to prevent mud and dirt tracking onto footways and adjoining roads (including wheel washing facilities). (v) Traffic management and access arrangements (vehicular and pedestrian) and parking provisions for contractors during the development process (including measures to reduce the numbers of construction vehicles accessing the site during peak hours). (vi) Measures to reduce the impact of the development on local air quality and dust through minimising emissions throughout the demolition and construction process. (vii) The storage of demolition/construction materials on site. The approved Construction Method Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period for the development. 9) No development shall take place until a scheme for the provision of sustainable water management shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Page 5 · Chunk 18 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro The scheme shall clearly demonstrate that sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) have been incorporated into the designs of the development in accordance with the hierarchy set out in accordance with Policy SI 13 of the London Plan (2021) and will: i. provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

Page 5 · Chunk 19 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro The scheme shall clearly demonstrate that sustainable drainage systems (SUDS) have been incorporated into the designs of the development in accordance with the hierarchy set out in accordance with Policy SI 13 of the London Plan (2021) and will: i. provide information about the design storm period and intensity, the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

Page 6 · Chunk 20 P Terceiro

72 Harefield Road, UXBRIDGE, UB8 1PL — London Borough of Hillingdon — P Terceiro Appeal Decision APP/R5510/W/23/3335976 from the site and the measures taken to prevent pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters; ii. include a timetable for its implementation; and iii. provide a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any other arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its lifetime. The scheme shall also demonstrate the use of methods to minimise the use of potable water through water collection, reuse and recycling and will: iv. provide details of water collection facilities to capture excess rainwater; v. provide details of how rain and grey water will be recycled and reused in the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be managed and maintained in accordance with the approved management and maintenance plan. *** END OF CONDITIONS *** https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Character and appearance
For appellant
¶4-7

The Inspector found that the proposal would replace a modest house with a four-storey pair of semi-detached dwellings, but the proposal would have reasonable gaps to the side plot boundaries and to the adjacent buildings. The Inspector also found that the proposal would respect the rhythm of buildings and spaces in the street scene.

Highway safety
Neutral
¶11

The Inspector found that the proposal would provide one additional dwelling within the site, and the uplift in vehicular movements during peak times would be limited. The Inspector also found that the reintroduction of the existing carriageway crossing, together with a second provision, would be acceptable.

Living conditions
Neutral
¶12

The Inspector found that the proposal would increase the number of residential properties on site, but the uplift would be limited, and it is unlikely that the proposal would result in additional noise and disturbance levels over and above what would be expected in this residential area.

Parking
For appellant
¶11

The Inspector found that the proposal would provide one additional dwelling within the site, and the number of parking spaces would be acceptable, as it would assist in reducing the potential for on-street parking.

Ecology and biodiversity
Against appellant
¶10

The Inspector found that there is no evidence before them to indicate that the proposal would harm biodiversity.

Planning obligations
For appellant
¶13-15

The Inspector found that the Council’s suggested planning conditions were amended where necessary for clarity, and new conditions were imposed to protect the character and appearance of the area and the living conditions of the nearest neighbours.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
Policies D3 and D4 of the London Plan 2021
Determinative
Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies (2012)
Determinative
Policies DMHB 11, and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020)
Substantial
National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework)
Moderate

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 6 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 1 August 2024 under the Open Government Licence.