Appeal 3286029

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues in this appeal are: • The effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area; and • The effect of the proposal upon the living conditions of surrounding residents, in particular those of Nos [address].

The appeal site lies within a residential area and comprises a two storey, detached dwelling. Surrounding dwellings, whilst being slightly different, exhibit a number of similar characteristics, which creates a feel of uniformity and regularity to the street scene. A number of properties have feature dormers to the front, whilst others have been altered through extensions. The adjoining dwelling has a dormer addition to the rear.

The appeal property is located at the end of a row of similar detached dwellings. As a result, the prominence of the appeal dwelling is minimised. Therefore, when viewed from [name], the rear of the appeal property is not readily visible. However, due to the surrounding topography, there are glimpsed views of the appeal site between the properties to the rear in [address].

Whilst views of the proposal would be limited by the existing appeal property and those around it, this does not remove the need for good design. The alterations to the roof and the insertion of the dormer and balcony would increase the overall bulk of the existing dwelling. Due to its size, mass and design, the proposal would create a form of development that would fail to sit comfortably with the existing dwelling. It would appear incongruous and therefore out of keeping with the general pattern of development in the area. As a result, the proposed development would create an addition to the existing property, which would detract from its character and appearance.

For the above reasons, I therefore conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area and, in this respect, would be contrary to Policies ENV10 and ENV12 of the [name], Weymouth and Portland Local Plan (Local Plan), the Design and Sustainable Development Guide (2009) and the Framework. Amongst other things, these policies seek to secure good design and ensure proposals are compatible with surrounding developments.

As a result of surrounding topography, the appeal site occupies a higher position compared to those to the rear. This, combined with its orientation means that there is already a degree of overlooking from the appeal property to those in [address].

Due to its position and its height in relation to surrounding dwellings, the proposed development would be likely to offer direct views into the gardens of properties to the rear, in particular Nos. 70 to [address]. Notwithstanding the level of overlooking that already exists, given the size and position of the dormer, the appeal proposal would introduce additional overlooking, to such a degree, that it would lead to further loss of privacy. This would harm the living conditions of neighbouring residents, in particular Nos [address].

For the above reasons, I therefore conclude that the proposed development would harm the living conditions of surrounding residents and, in this respect, would be contrary to Policy ENV16 of the Local Plan and the Framework. Amongst other things, these policies seek to minimise their impact on the amenity of existing residents.

In coming to this conclusion, I have also considered other developments within the vicinity of the appeal site, however, none are sufficiently comparable to the proposal to overcome my conclusion in relation to the harm that would be caused.

The applicant has referred me to existing permitted development rights to extend the property. However, such permitted development rights are largely universal, with the vast majority of properties afforded the right to extend without the need for planning permission, as such this carries only limited weight. In any event, this is not considered to outweigh the conflict I have found with the development plan.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.