Appeal 3303423

The appeal is dismissed.

The description of development is taken from the application form. The Council’s decision notice describes the development as “hip to gable roof extensions to both sides, raising of ridge height, rear dormer, 2 front rooflights and 2 side windows.”

The main issues in this case are the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; and its effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Number [address] with regards to outlook.

The appeal property is a two storey, brick and tile-built detached dwelling. It is set back from the road behind a driveway and has a longer garden to the rear.

The appeal property is located in a residential area characterised by the presence of two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings set back from the road behind short gardens and/or parking areas and with longer gardens to the rear.

The topography of the area is such that [address] slopes significantly, rising from west to east. This results in the appeal property sitting noticeably higher than its immediate neighbour to the lower side, Number [address] and lower than its immediate neighbour to the higher side, Number [address]. The local topography presents a “stepped” appearance to dwellings in the area, lending a sense of uniformity as houses step up the hill.

During my site visit, I observed that many houses in the area have been altered and/or extended and that such changes tend to appear in keeping with host dwellings and the surrounding area.

The proposed development would result in the raising of the roof’s ridge height and the creation of a large crown roof dormer. I find that the design and overall scale of the proposal would result in a development so bulky as to appear out of proportion with the host property. This would lead the house to appear top heavy and as a result, the proposed development would draw attention to itself as an unsympathetic addition.

Consequently, the proposal would fail to appear subservient to or respect, the appearance of the host property. 10.Further to the above, the proposal would raise the height of the roof to a similar height to that of No 12. This would erode the stepped appearance of dwellings in the area and would add to the incongruous appearance of the proposal within its immediate surroundings, where no such development exists. 11.Taking the above into account, I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area. This would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Local Plan1 Policies GC1, H15 and H18; to Core Strategy2 Policy CS20; and to the Council’s SPD3 which together amongst other things, seek to protect local character. Living conditions 12.The appeal property already sits considerably higher than its neighbour, No 10. The proposed development would add significant height and bulk to the appeal property and I find that this would lead the proposal to appear to “loom” above the rear of No 10 to a dominant and overbearing degree. 13.Consequently, I find that the proposed development would harm the living conditions of the occupiers of Number [address] with regards to outlook, contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Local Plan Policies GC3 and H14; to Core Strategy Policy CS20; and to the Council’s SPD, which together amongst other things, seek to protect residential amenity.