Appeal 3301670

The appeal is allowed and the planning permission Ref 20/03845/HFUL for development described as “amendment to S/0371/08/F 'Extension to dwelling and erection of double garage/conservatory' to include the installation of a roof light and the removal of a first floor window on the southern elevation” at [site address] , Gamlingay [postcode] , granted on 31 May 2022 by South Cambridgeshire District Council, is varied by deleting condition No 3.

Planning permission for development described in the banner heading was approved on 31 May 2022. This planning permission included a number of conditions, one of which requires the roof light window in the south facing elevation to be non-opening and obscurely glazed. This permission followed an earlier permission (ref S/0371/08/F) at the same site for the “extension to dwelling and erection of double garage/conservatory”.

The Council’s statement indicates that the condition is necessary to protect the living conditions of the occupants of [address], in particular in relation to the overlooking of private garden space. This is consistent with the reasons for the condition given on the decision notice.

Taking the above into account the main issue is whether the condition is reasonable or necessary in the interests of the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, in particular in relation to the privacy of the occupants of [address].

[site address] is a modern 2-storey end of terrace dwelling set within a street scene of similar dwellings. The property is located at the end of a cul de sac and the front elevation faces the side elevation of [address]. The property has been extended at two storeys to the side. A screen of vegetation borders the appeal site to the south.

The proposed roof light would face the rear garden of No 28. Whilst the southern boundary is lined with vegetation, I observed during my winter site visit that during such times when the trees are not in leaf there are gaps in this boundary vegetation. Nonetheless, it is clear from the proposed drawings that the roof light would be located well above eye level. Thus, even if the rooflight were open, it would not enable views out of this room and consequently would not result in actual or perceived overlooking of No 28.

I therefore conclude that a condition to control the glazing and opening of the rooflight is not reasonable or necessary in the interests of safeguarding the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. As such there would be compliance with those aims of Policy HQ/1 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan (2018) which requires that new development protects the health and amenity of occupiers and surrounding uses from development that is overlooking, and the District Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2010) which has similar aims. I also find compliance with paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) which requires that development create places with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.

For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should succeed, and the planning permission varied by deleting the disputed condition.