Appeal 3300427

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are the effects of the proposals on: (i) the character and appearance of the surrounding area, and (ii) the living conditions of the occupiers of [address], with particular regard to privacy.

The appeal property is a detached bungalow with a garage to the front and a small garden to the rear. It forms part of a group of bungalows of similar age, appearance and size that occupy land to the rears of the dwellings facing [address] and [address]. These bungalows have hipped roofs which gives them a degree of visual unity and well as ensuring that they are relatively diminutive features in views from surrounding properties and gardens.

The proposal would primarily comprise the raising of the roof to enable the formation of 3 bedrooms and a bathroom within the expanded roof form. Whilst the roof would retain its hipped form, the increase in height and bulk would result in the appeal property having an uncharacteristically top-heavy appearance that would be at odds with the scale and appearance of the group of bungalows of which it forms part.

For these reasons I conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the surrounding area. It therefore fails to accord with Policy CS17 of the Fareham Borough Core Strategy 2011 which, amongst other requirements, seeks to ensure that new development is of high quality design and respects the key characteristics of the area including scale, form, spaciousness and built form.

The appeal property has a small and shallow rear garden beyond which is [address], a bungalow with living space looking out over a similarly small rear garden. The pair of gardens are separated by a fence that provides a good degree of privacy between these closely spaced dwellings.

The proposed first floor level bedrooms would each gain natural light and outlook via rooflights positioned in the rear roof slope. Due to their elevated position these rooflights would allow views towards the rear elevation of No.16A. It was apparent from my visit to No.16A that the degree of overlooking resulting from the proposal would be oppressive, particularly in the context of the high levels of existing privacy afforded to the group of bungalows.

For this reason, I conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptable effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of [address]. It therefore fails to comply with Policy DSP3 of the Fareham Local Plan Part 2: Development Sites and Policies (2015). This policy states that development proposals should ensure that there will be no unacceptable adverse impact upon living conditions on the site or neighbouring development, by way of the loss of sunlight, daylight, outlook and/or privacy.

For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should fail.