Appeal 3285433

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area.

The appeal property is a 1960’s detached chalet style bungalow that has been extended and modernised and is now formed of three gable ended elements of varying height. The host dwelling has an attractive contemporary design and is located within a bend in the road which can be seen from the south westerly direction. The area has a suburban character which is comprised of a mix of detached two storey dwellings, bungalows and chalet style bungalows. Many of the properties within the vicinity have been altered, and there are some instances where two storey dwellings are positioned next to bungalows. However, the appeal property is located within a row of detached single storey bungalows that form a staggered building line. Properties within the area are set well back from the highway and have pitched roof forms.

The proposal consists of a part ground floor and part first floor extension. This includes extending the existing part of the roof pitches on the present bungalow as well as the formation of a flat roof area. This would provide two bedrooms with en-suite bathrooms and a balcony at first floor and would create Appeal Decision: APP/Q3115/D/21/3285433 a canopy over the front door. The proposal also involves a relatively modest ground floor front extension which increases the size of one of the bedrooms and removes one bedroom and garden store to create a double garage in the form of a gable projection.

Goal six of the [name] 2016 (the [name]) is to achieve extensions that respond to the needs of the occupants in a way that is sensitive to the character and appearance of the original dwelling and street scene. More specifically paragraph 6.3 states that extensions should use simple, uncomplicated building forms that compliment and coordinate with the scale, form and massing of the original dwelling. Furthermore, paragraph 6.6 states that extensions should have a roof form appropriate to the original dwelling.

Although the extension of the roof pitches would be set in from both the front and rear of the property and highway, the eaves height would remain the same and the existing pitch of the roof slope would be replicated, the proposed roof form would not be simple and uncomplicated, forming a flat top pyramid shape. Consequently, it would appear distinctly different in comparison to the original dwelling and its neighbours. The additional height and roof form with the flat roof element, when viewed in context next to the neighbouring bungalows which have a broadly similar appearance and roof form, would be an incongruous addition to the street scene. Even though the dwelling sits on a curve and would only be readily seen from the south westerly direction, from these views it would be particularly obtrusive causing harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area and would therefore conflict with the [name].

The gable projection containing the proposed double garage would retain a similar form and the proportions of the openings and building materials would match those that exist at present. Furthermore, the part of the proposal that includes a relatively modest front extension to the garage and bedrooms would form minor alterations. However, these aspects would not mitigate against the harm identified above.

For the reasons detailed above, the proposed development would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling, surrounding area and street scene. The proposal would be in conflict with Policies DES1, DES2 and H20 of the South Oxfordshire Local Plan 2011-2035 which seek new development that is of a high quality and designed to respect, visually enhance and complement the positive features that make up the character of the local area with regards to landform, layout, building orientation, massing, landscaping, scale, height, density, grain, details of the surrounding area and advice within the [name].

Based on the above, and having regard to all matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed.