Contact: Rupinder Dhaliwal E-Mail: rupinder.dhaliwal@hounslow.gov.uk

Heston and Cranford Area Committee 18th November 2010

Heston Central

233 Bath Road, Hounslow, TW3 3DA (321951) Report by: Development Control Support Manager

Summary

This report seeks Members’ authority to issue an enforcement notice in respect of the erection of a partly built two-storey side extension and single storey side and single storey rear extension to the house without the benefit of planning permission.

1.0 RECOMMENDATION

1.1 That the Committee considers it expedient, having regard to the provisions of the Unitary Development Plan, and all material considerations, to grant authority for:

1.2 All necessary steps to be taken for the preparation, issue and service of an enforcement notice in relation to 233 Bath Road, Hounslow requiring within three calendar months:

• Demolition of the side and rear extensions

• Removal of all resultant debris from the site; or

• Re-build the extensions in accordance to the approved plans of application reference 00083/235/P15.

And for:

The institution of any necessary legal proceedings in the event of non-compliance with the above enforcement notice, pursuant to Section 179 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

The carrying out of works in default under Section 178 of the Act in the event of non-compliance with the enforcement notice, including the recovery of the Council’s costs in carrying out such work.

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1 The site contains a two-storey detached property located on a prominent corner plot at the junction of Bath Road and Sutton Lane. The rear boundary of the site backs on to the side boundary of 2 Sutton Lane. The site comprises a modest rear garden and hardstanding to the front garden. The site is within St Paul’s Church Conservation Area.

2.2 The property itself is of a mock- Tudor style with large bay windows to the front elevation and a gable end roof over the first floor bay. The property is set forward of

neighbouring property No. 235. To the rear of the property is a two-storey projection to the east with a gable end roof over. A side and rear extension has been partially built to the property which are the subject of this report. The side extension appears to be partially two-storey and partially single storey however is not as yet complete. The rear extension would appear to be a single storey structure.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY AND OTHER RECORDS

3.1 Planning Records 00083/233/P15

Erection of a part two and single storey side extension, and single storey rear extension to house. Approved: 21/03/2006 00083/233/P16

Erection of a part two-storey side extension, part two- storey, part single storey rear extension including four new rooflights.

Refused: 12/06/2008

00083/233/P17

Erection of a single storey detached outbuilding to the rear of the house.

Refused: 22/05/2008

00083/233/P18

Erection of a two-storey side extension and single storey rear extension to the house

Withdrawn: 11/08/2009

00083/233/P19

Two-storey side extension and part ground floor, part two-storey rear extensions

Refused: 12/01/2010

Appeal Dismissed: 19/05/2010 (APP/F5540/D/10/2125731)

3.2 Building Control Records FP/2007/0880

Single storey rear two storey rear and side extension.

Rejected: 13/06/2007

3.3 Other Council Records

September 2008 Aerial photography

May 2007 Aerial photography

4.0 ENFORCEMENT HISTORY, INVESTIGATION AND EVIDENCE.

4.1 The side and rear extension are in breach of planning control as they do not benefit from planning permission and they are not in accordance with the General Permitted Development Order (as amended) 1995, the order in place at the time of construction, as they have a volume of more than 50m3 in a conservation area. The side and rear extensions have not been built in accordance with the approved plans of application reference 00083/233/P15. The 2007 aerial photography above shows that the extensions had not commenced and therefore are not immune from enforcement action.

4.2 Following a site visit on the 29th January 2008 by a planning officer it was established that the extensions to the property were not being built in accordance to the approved plans of application 00083/233/P15. The approved plans show the side extension set back 1m from the main front wall of the house, with a set in from the boundary of between 2.9 and 1.7m. The first floor element should also be set back 1m from the main front wall of the house and set in 900mm from the main rear wall of the house. Below are the approved floor plans, which show the approved dimensions of the extensions.

Side and rear extensions commenced

Works not commenced

The following pictures show the approved proposed elevations with pictures taken on site, which clearly show that the extensions are not in accordance.

Front elevation

No set back from main front elevation

Side elevation

Rear elevation

Set back should be in line with main rear elevation and not two-storey projection

4.3 On the 29th January 2008 a letter was sent to the owner of the property, which stated that the extensions were not being built in accordance to the approved plans. The owner was given until the 1st March to alter the extensions so that they were in line with the approved plans, otherwise a breach of condition notice would be issued.

4.4 On the 12th June 2008 an application for erection of a part two-storey side extension, part two- storey, part single storey rear extension including four new roof lights was refused for the following reasons:

The proposed extensions due to their inappropriate design, and their excessive size and scale, with a bulky appearance not being proportionate with the existing house on this prominent corner plot, would harm the appearance and character of the site and the surrounding St Paul's Conservation Area. This would be contrary to adopted policies ENV-B.1.1 (New Development), ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas), H.6.4 (Extensions and Alterations), and Residential Extension Guidelines, of the adopted Hounslow Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed part two-storey and single storey rear extension due to its size, scale, and position, would be harmful to residents' living conditions at 235 Bath Road through reduced daylight, loss of outlook, and overbearing appearance. This would therefore be contrary to policies ENV-B.1.1 (All New Development), H.6.4 (Extensions and Alterations), Residential Extension Guidelines, of the adopted Hounslow Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed extensions did not mirror what was built on site, nor did they reflect the previously approved permission.

4.5 On the 23rd July 2009 a site visit was conducted to establish if the extensions had been altered to accord with the approved plans. A letter was sent to the owner advising that access was not gained and to contact the case officer to arrange a site visit.

4.6 On the 5th August 2009 a letter was sent to the owner of the property following a site visit which stated that the extension were not being built in accordance to the approved plans and as such there were three options to avoid enforcement action. The options

Full width rear extension with excessive depth

were to apply for planning permission to retain the extensions, rebuild the extensions to accord with the approved permission or to demolish the extensions.

4.7 On the 11th August 2009 an application for the erection of a two-storey side extension and single storey rear extension to the house was withdrawn by the owner.

4.8 On the 12th January 2010 an application for the erection of a two-storey side extension and part ground floor, part two-storey rear extensions was refused for the following reasons:

The proposed extensions due to their excessive and disproportionate size and scale and design, out of keeping with the house, would harm the appearance and character of this prominent corner site and would neither preserve nor enhance the special character and appearance of the St Paul's Church Conservation Area. This is contrary to policies ENV-B.1.1 (New Development), ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas), H.6.4 (Extensions and Alterations), and the Residential Extension Guidelines, of the adopted Hounslow Unitary Development Plan.

The proposed extensions appear to somewhat reflect what has been partly built on site (however smaller) and differ from the approved plans of 00083/233/P15 in that the side extension would be built right up to the front wall of the house at ground level and extend up to the rear wall at both ground and first floor level. The proposed rear extension would be wider and deeper than the approved extension.

4.9 The owner submitted an appeal against the above refusal, which was dismissed. The owner has been advised on numerous occasions by planning officers and enforcement officers in regards to the unauthorised extensions and what is required to avoid enforcement action. There is a currently approved application 00083/233/P15, which can be implemented.

4.10 The owner has advised the Enforcement Team that he will be submitting a further planning application showing the alterations as advised by planning officers. He has been advised that should a valid application not be received by the 20th November 2010 then subject to gaining authorisation at committee an enforcement notice will be served requiring the steps outlined in section 1.2 of this report.

5.0 ANALYSIS

Expediency in general

5.1 Under Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), the Council has the power to take enforcement action where it assesses that a breach of planning control has resulted in material harm in planning terms.

5.2 Guidance as to how to apply this power and when a Council should find enforcement action expedient is contained in PPG18 and Circular 10/97, both entitled ‘Enforcing Planning Control’. The government urges local planning authorities to use enforcement action as a last resort. Reports are not brought forward to committee unless it has been concluded that there is no other course of action available.

5.3 In addition to Government guidance the statutory Development Plan sets criteria against which to judge whether a breach of planning control is unacceptable.

5.4 Determining applications for full or outline planning permission

When determining applications for planning permission, the authority is required to have regard to the development plan, so far as is material, and to any other material considerations. In addition, the determination must be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

5.5 The Development Plan

The Development Plan for the Borough comprises the saved policies in the Council’s Unitary Development Plan (‘UDP’), the Employment Development Plan Document, the Brentford Area Action Plan and the London Plan.

The London Plan (Consolidated with alterations since 2004) was adopted in February 2008.

The UDP was adopted in December 2003 and was amended and saved as of 28 September 2007 by Direction from the Secretary of State.

The Employment Development Plan Document was adopted on 25 November 2008 and has superseded the Employment Policies contained in UDP Chapter 7 and the following Implementation Policies contained in UDP Chapter 2: IMP.4.1, IMP.4.2, IMP.4.3, and IMP.4.4.

The Brentford Area Action Plan was adopted on 27 January 2009 and has superseded the following Implementation Policies contained in UDP Chapter 2: IMP.2.1 and IMP.3.1.

5.6 Supplementary Planning Documents

Planning Obligations Air Quality

These SPDs were adopted on 11/03/08, following public consultation in July and August 2007. The documents form part of the Local Development Framework.

5.7 Supplementary Planning Guidance

1997 Supplementary Planning Guidance- The guidance contained within the Supplementary Guidance was subject to formal public consultation and unlike normal SPG were subject to an inquiry process and consideration by a government inspector.The Inspectors report recommended the appendices be removed from the plan, as they added to its bulk, cost and complexity and may well have consumed further resources at the first review of the UDP. He also considered that they could stand alone away from the main plan as SPG. This was the course of action to be taken by the Council.During the consultation process, objections were received from individual house builders and the HBF. The guidance was amended as part of the process. The Council did not therefore consider it necessary to reconsult on this proposed guidance, but simply to use the guidance in light of the suggested amendments and the Inspector’s comments.

Residential Extensions Guidelines- The information contained in the Residential Extension Guidelines underwent 2 months of public consultation prior to adoption as Supplementary Planning Guidance in August 2003 to Policy H.6.4 of the Council’s 2003 Unitary Development Plan. Conservation areas and determining applications for Planning Permission or Conservation Area Consent In considering whether to grant consent with respect to any buildings or other land in a conservation area, the authority shall pay special attention to desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area.

Conservation Area Character Appraisals- This appraisal was created as a response to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which required that the current UDP be replaced by a Local Development Framework, which is group of policy documents, including conservation area character appraisals. The current UDP contains saved policy on (insert) Conservation Area, as detailed in the paragraph above. The appraisal was also a response to Section 71 of the Planning and Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act 1990, which requires that conservation area appraisals be reviewed. English Heritage is also encouraging Councils to provide up-to-date management guidance for every conservation area.

Hounslow Council began this process in reports to Area planning committees in January 2006, which included appraisals for all the borough’s conservation areas, the effects of designation and draft management guidelines. The appraisals for each document were adopted at Committee on 21/03/06. Public consultations with interested groups and local residents are taking place over three years to finalise the management guidelines for the various conservation areas.

Relevant Planning Policy

5.8 The Development Plan policies relevant to this case are:

ENV-B.1.1 New Development

In relation to the context, form and layout of the buildings and spaces, new development should:

Relate well to its site and the scale, nature, height, massing, character and use of the adjacent townscape. Respect the proportions of existing neighbouring buildings where there are strong uniform design characteristics, such as doors, windows and roofs. Use durable and high quality materials, that relate satisfactorily to its surroundings in terms of colour, scale, texture and pattern

H.6.4 Extensions and Alterations

Extensions should normally be consistent with the Council’s guidelines on house extensions and meet the following criteria:

Position: Extensions should respect property boundaries and be positioned to avoid loss of light to adjoining properties. Materials: Proposals should aim to match the type of materials and colour to

both the existing building and surrounding area. Details: Attention should be paid to design details, such as position and style of windows and doors and must complement the existing building and respect the character of the area.

ENV-B.2.2 Conservation Areas

Policy ENV-B.2.2 states that the Council will seek to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of conservation areas by ensuring that any development respects the character of the existing architecture in scale, design and materials.

St Paul’s Church Conservation Area Character Appraisal

The St Paul’s Church Conservation Area Character Appraisal states that the guiding principles for new development are:

• Preservation of St Paul’s Church and its setting as a Victorian Landmark.

• The gaps between surrounding properties should be considered.

Policy H.6.4 is Supplemented by the Residential Extension Guidelines

Section 1 Single storey rear extension

Section 1 of the Residential Extension Guidelines states that the maximum depth for single storey rear extensions to a detached house is 4.25 metres. It is considered important that this type of extension is secondary to the original house and should not project too far from the rear wall of the original dwelling, as this could block light for neighbouring properties. The design, position and size of windows and doors should reflect that of the existing house, and, in order to avoid overlooking of neighbours, windows and doors should only be placed in the rear wall of the extension. The finished appearance of the extension should match the materials used in the original house.

Section 3 Single storey side extensions

Section 3 of the Residential Extension Guidelines states that side extensions should reflect the design of the main house and remain secondary in their size and appearance. The height and width of the extension should be in proportion to the main house and the width should be less than half the width of the house. The sidewall should be parallel to the original house and the extension should be set back at least 1m from the main front wall of the house.

Section 4 Two-storey side extensions

Section 4 of The Residential Extension Guidelines states that, to minimise their impact on neighbour’s, two storey side extensions

should accurately reflect the design of the main house and remain secondary in their size and appearance. The height and width should be proportionate to the dimensions of the main house. The sidewall of the extension should be parallel to the original house; the extension should be set back at least 1m from the main front wall of the house. The design of the roof should match that of the main roof of the original house. The finish of the extension should match or complement the appearance of the original house and any doors and windows should also reflect the design, size and appearance of existing ones on the main house. Provisions should also be made for off-street parking requirements.

Section 8 Development in Conservation Areas

Any new development in conservation areas must be of a high standard of design and have regard for the existing architectural style, scale, proportion, position, materials, roof, boundary treatment and landscaping that lie within and surround the site. Development in a conservation area must preserve and/ or enhance the special character and appearance of the area.

5.9 The key planning issues in this case are therefore:

• The acceptability of the development in principle

• The impact of the development on the character of St Paul’s conservation area and character of the property

• The impact of the development on neighbours’ living conditions

Assessment of Harm

5.10 The acceptability of the development in principle

The erection of a two-storey side extension, single storey side and rear extensions are acceptable in principle subject to compliance with relevant UDP policies, The Residential Extension Guidelines and an assessment of harm.

5.11 The impact of the development on the character of St Paul’s Church Conservation Area and character of the property

The extensions have partially been built, and have been in their current situation since at least January 2008 as indicated by a site visit.

Two storey side extension

As previously stated it appears that a two-storey side extension has been partially built. The residential extension guidelines state that side extensions should be set back at least 1m from the main front elevation of the property to ensure that they remains subordinate to the main house. The existing side extension at ground floor level has been built in line with the main front elevation of the house; the first floor element has been set back approximately 500mm from the main front elevation. The approved plans show the ground floor and first floor set back 1m from the front elevation of the house, and this would have ensured that the extensions remained subordinate. The

approved plan also showed the rear of the two storey element set in line with the main rear elevation of the house, however the extension has been built in line with the two storey rear projection. The extension has also been built 200mm wider than the approved plans. The two-storey side extension as built results in a bulky and overbearing feature particularly when viewed from Sutton Road, the lack of appropriate set ins results in a dominant feature to this prominent corner plot. Therefore causing harm to the characteristics of St Paul’s Church Conservation Area and detracting from the features of the original house. Single storey side extension and single storey rear extension

The single storey side and rear extensions are mostly complete externally. The single storey element of the side extension begins at the main rear elevation of the house and joins the single storey rear extension thereby creating one large rear extension extending the entire width of the site. The depth of these extensions as measured from the main rear elevation of the house is 6.6m deep. The residential extension guidelines suggest a maximum depth of 4.25m for single storey rear extensions to detached houses such as this and the approved plans showed a rear extension of 3.65m deep and a single storey side extension of a further 2m deeper than the original rear elevation. Therefore the single storey side/ rear extensions are 2.35m deeper then the suggested maximum depth set by the Residential Extension Guidelines and 2.95m (rear) and 4.6m (side) deeper then the approved depths. Furthermore the joining of the side and rear extensions is contrary to the approved plans which showed them as separate extensions. The resultant extensions create excessive and overbearing bulk to the rear of this modest property. The rear/ side extensions dominate the rear of the house and cause harm to the character of St Paul’s Church Conservation Area and the character of the main property.

In a dismissed appeal decision1 for extensions that most closely reflect what has been built on site (however smaller) the inspector noted, “The proposal would significantly increase the bulk of the original building, to the extent that it would not be subservient to it.” He went on to state “…the proposal would have a dominating effect on the original dwelling, and impose itself starkly on the streetscene.”

5.12 The impact of the development on neighbours’ living conditions

There is currently an enforcement case on neighbouring property 235 Bath Road, for the single storey rear extension, which has been built higher than the approved plans show. However the depth of the extension is in line with the extension at 233 Bath Road and therefore there is no harm to the residents of No. 235 as a result of the rear extension to 233. The side extension is set some 7.6m away from No.235, which is also set further back off Bath Road then No. 233 and therefore there is no harm to No.235 as a result of the side extension.

The nearest property to the east of the site is 197 Bath Road, this property is approximately 28m away from the side elevation of the side extension. Therefore the extensions at 233 would not cause loss of light or overshadowing to these residents. However No. 197 is positioned at an angle directly facing the partly built two-storey side extension resulting in an unsightly outlook from the front of the property.

1 APP/F5540/D/10/2125731

Proposed action

5.13 Demolition of the side and rear extensions and removal of all resultant debris from the site, or rebuild the extensions in accordance to the approved plans of application reference 00083/233/P15.

6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

6.1 Overall it is considered that due to their inappropriate size, scale, massing and positioning the partly built two storey side extension, single storey side extension and single storey rear extension cause unacceptable harm to the characteristics of St Paul’s Church Conservation Area and the main property through their overbearing, dominant and excessive presence on a prominent corner plot and are therefore contrary to Unitary Development Plan Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New Developments), ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas) and H.6.4 (Extensions and Alterations) and the Residential Extension Guidelines.

6.2 Based on the information in this report it has been concluded that no action short of the proposed enforcement action described in this report can remove the harm caused by these breaches of planning control. In these circumstances, it is considered expedient to take enforcement action as recommended at the start of this report.

Background Papers:

Unitary Development Plan Policies ENV-B.1.1 (New Developments), ENV-B.2.2 (Conservation Areas) and H.6.4 (Extensions and Alterations), St Paul’s Church Conservation Area Character Appraisal and the Residential Extension Guidelines can be viewed online at www.hounslow.gov.uk at the civic centre or at local libraries. Decision notices for planning application references 00083/233/P15, 00083/233/P16, 00083/233/P17, 00083/233/P18 and 00083/233/P19 can be viewed on line at the above address. Arrangements, to view the associated documents, can be made by emailing planning.searches@hounslow.gov.uk.