Appeal 3271995

The appeal is allowed and prior approval is given for the enlargement of a bungalow by creation of an additional storey at [site address] , Teignmouth [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/00254/HPA, dated 1 February 2021, and the plans submitted with it.

The original application form was for a lawful development certificate. However, it describes a proposal for prior approval under permitted development rights. The Council registered the application as one for prior approval and determined it as such, having carried out appropriate notifications. The appeal form and evidence confirms that this was also the intention of the appellant. Given the procedures followed by the Council, I am content that no injustice would arise if I were to also consider the appeal as a proposal for prior approval.

The description of development on the application form is convoluted. I have used the description from the Council’s decision notice, which is also given on the appeal form and succinctly describes the proposal.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed external appearance of the dwellinghouse on the character and appearance of the area.

Nos. 2-12 (even) [address] are a row of dwellings that appear to have been built as a group of identically designed houses. While there remains some uniformity in the design of this group, they are located within an area containing a wide variety of housing styles. No.12 is at one end of the row and a bend in the road reduces the ability to appreciate it as part of the group. Given the overall variety of designs, the proposed external appearance and effective loss from the group would not harm the character and appearance of the area. As the undercroft garage is slightly below road level, the extra storey would not seem overly large or harm the principal elevation of the dwelling.

[address] slopes steeply. The adjoining property on the downhill side is a bungalow. As such, No.12 is in a prominent position when looking up the hill. However, some of the other dwellings on [address] are raised up from the highway and are also prominent in views along the road. Due to the topography and variety of dwellings, it is part the area’s appearance that some dwellings appear more prominent than others. A dwelling opposite the site at a similar height appears to be nearing completion and the proposal would have a similar presence in the street scene to this.

It is possible to see the site from the opposite side of the valley. However, in those views, the proposal would appear as a small part of the wider area of mixed suburban housing, within which some houses are more noticable than others. I, therefore, find that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area and that prior approval for the external appearance of the dwellinghouse should be given.

There are conditions set out in the legislation relating to external materials, construction management, requirements to notify the Council of the completion of the development, and carrying out the development in accordance with the submitted details. As such, I have not repeated them here.

I, therefore, conclude that the appeal should be allowed.