Case 3367268

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF

London Borough of Bexley — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
30 October 2025
Authority
London Borough of Bexley
Inspector
Goldberg V
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Development type
Minor Dwellings
Appellant
Mr M Catton
LPA reference
24/00462/FUL
ONS LPA code
E09000004
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
19 June 2025

Summary AI

The appeal for a new self-build bungalow on a rear garden site was dismissed due to the proposal's design being at odds with the prevailing character of the area. The design was deemed to be incongruous and would fail to integrate with the established pattern of development, contravening policies SP5 and DP11 of the Bexley Local Plan 2023 and Policy D3 of the London Plan.

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

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 3 September 2025 by V Goldberg BSc (Hons) MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 30 October 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/D5120/W/25/3367268 Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, Kent DA15 8AF • 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 M Catton against the decision of the Council of the London Borough of Bexley. • The application Ref is 25/00462/FUL. • The development proposed is new self- build 1 bedroom bungalow. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. The address on the application form refers to the existing dwelling on site as opposed to the land to the rear of it. The decision notice and appeal form refer to the appeal site as rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, therefore the site address in the banner heading above has been amended to correlate with these documents, as this best reflects the address of the appeal site. 3. Amended plans have been submitted as part of the appeal, indicating a minor adjustment to the location of the proposed off-street parking space and vehicle access.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision This alteration does not constitute a fundamental change to the proposal. The Council’s Highway Officer and interested parties have had the opportunity to review the revised plans during the appeal. Accordingly, I am satisfied that it would be procedurally fair to accept them. The Council confirms that it has no objections to the revised parking area and vehicle access and on this basis the second reason for refusal has been addressed. Main Issue 4. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 5. The appeal site is located to the rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue and is accessed via Old Farm Road East. Old Farm Avenue is predominantly characterised by two- storey semi-detached dwellings featuring two-storey projecting bays. Similar properties are found along Old Farm Road East, although the surrounding area includes a mix of detached and terraced houses. Despite some variation in architectural style, the dwellings generally face the road, have a vertical emphasis, comparable widths, and are set behind small front gardens.

Page 1 · Chunk 2 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision This consistent arrangement contributes to a coherent and established suburban character which positively contributes to the character and appearance of the area. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 1 · Chunk 3 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision This consistent arrangement contributes to a coherent and established suburban character which positively contributes to the character and appearance of the area. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 4 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/D5120/W/25/3367268 6. Despite the design of the proposal being altered and reduced in scale from a previous scheme, and it benefits from a larger area of private amenity space, the overall design and proportions remain at odds with the prevailing character of the area. This is because the proposed bungalow would be notably lower and wider compared to neighbouring dwellings. While the surrounding context includes a mix of property types, they share common characteristics, such as a vertical emphasis and consistent scale that the proposal would lack. Although the scheme would not constitute overdevelopment and would maintain adequate separation from adjacent dwellings, it would nonetheless appear incongruous within its setting and fail to integrate successfully with the established pattern of development. 7. Policy D3 of the London Plan promotes a design-led approach to optimising site capacity. While the proposal would make efficient use of the land, it has not been demonstrated that this could not be achieved through an alternative scheme that better reflects and integrates with the established pattern of development.

Page 2 · Chunk 5 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision The efficient use of land, although desirable, must be balanced with the need for proposals to respond positively to their context and contribute to local character. In this case, the design fails to achieve that balance. 8. While the proposal would not adversely impact neighbouring residential amenity and would utilise complimentary materials while providing residential accommodation of a compliant standard, this does not override the need for the design of the proposal to protect the character of the area. 9. For the above reasons, the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. It would therefore be contrary to Policies SP5, and DP11 of the Bexley Local Plan 2023 and Policy D3 of the London Plan. Amongst other things, these policies seek proposals to be design led and contribute positively to the local environment. Other Matters 10. Whilst there have been no objections to the scheme, this would not imply that the proposal complies with the development plan. 11.

Page 2 · Chunk 6 Appeal Decision

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — Appeal Decision The appeal scheme is detailed as self-build in the description of development, but a self-build exemption claim form has not been submitted, the appellant has not demonstrated that he is on the self-build register and there is no mechanism to ensure that the proposal would be constructed or used in this manner. 12. Whilst the proposal is a small windfall site which would positively contribute to the supply of homes, given the quantum of development, this benefit would be limited and should not come at the expense of the harm identified. Accordingly, the harm would not be outweighed by the benefits. Conclusion 13. The proposal conflicts with the development plan and material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it, accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Page 2 · Chunk 7 V Goldberg

Rear of 38 Old Farm Avenue, Sidcup, DA15 8AF — London Borough of Bexley — V Goldberg INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

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

Main issues and findings

Character and appearance
Against appellant
¶6

The proposal's design and proportions were deemed to be at odds with the prevailing character of the area, despite some variation in architectural style.

Character and appearance
Against appellant
¶7

The proposal failed to balance the need for efficient land use with the need for proposals to respond positively to their context and contribute to local character.

Character and appearance
Against appellant
¶9

The proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area, contrary to policies SP5 and DP11 of the Bexley Local Plan 2023 and Policy D3 of the London Plan.

Planning obligations
Against appellant
¶11

The appellant failed to demonstrate that the proposal would be constructed or used as a self-build, and there was no mechanism to ensure this.

Flood risk
Neutral

Not explicitly addressed in the decision letter, but mentioned as a consideration in the summary.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
Bexley Local Plan 2023 SP5
Determinative
Bexley Local Plan 2023 DP11
Determinative
London Plan D3
Determinative

Site constraints from the Casework Database

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

Source

Decision letter, 2 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 30 October 2025 under the Open Government Licence.