Appeal 3312286

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted to erect first floor extension over garage providing car port beneath at [site address] , Weymouth [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref: P/HOU/2022/03188, dated 13 May 2022, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 2904:399/001 [name]; 2904/399/003 [name].

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until surface water drainage works have been implemented in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

The main issue in this case is the effects of the development on the character and appearance of the appeal property and the wider area.

The appeal property, No. [site address] , is situated to the north-eastern end of [address], a modern housing development consisting of predominately two storey dwellings, which front closely to the highway on either side presenting a close-knit enclosing characteristic. Whilst the general form of the buildings along [address] are consistent, there are some minor variations from plot to plot in terms of siting, design detailing and finishes which provides visual and character interest. Where there are gaps between the built form, these are for short sections to provide for parking spaces with recessed single storey garages set behind. Appeal Decision: APP/D1265/D/22/3312286

No.46 itself is part of a short curvature of a two storey scale presenting to the highway with no 48 to the north-west. No. 46 straightens out with the highway to its eastern end, with a parking area and a detached double garage thereafter, before the building form along [address] comes to an end.

The building void provided by the parking spaces and subsequent detached garage to the east of no. 46, alongside the relatively short grouping of a two storey scale with no.48, provides for an odd cessation to the built form on this side of [address], which is not particularly reflective of the enclosing characteristics of the wider street scene as outlined above.

To my mind, the appeal proposal, which would provide for the continuity of the two-storey scale of no.46, would be more consistent with the building characteristics found elsewhere on [address] and would be reflective of the associated spatial and physical relationships with the highway.

Whilst the footprint is stepped back from the forward building line of no. 46 and the ridge would be slightly lower, these are not unusual characteristics in the immediate area, where minor variations in building line and scale are found.

I acknowledge that the proposal would deviate visually in part from other buildings fronting toward the highway as it would provide for parking at the ground floor level. However, for the reasons set out above, and as the appeal proposal would ultimately replace an existing parking area and double garage, I do not consider the proposal would represent an incongruous addition as a result.

[name] have taken into account the concerns raised by the Council regarding a perceived lack of subservience to no 46, in this case, for the reasons set out above, I do not consider the proposal would appear at odds with the surrounding context, it would reflect the building form found along [address] and would not harm the character and appearance of no. 46.

As a result, the appeal proposal will accord with Policies ENV10 and ENV12 of the [name], Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015) which require development proposals to be informed by the character of the site and its surroundings; and that any alterations to or extensions of buildings should be well related to and not overpower the original building. I also find no conflict with Policy CNP11 of the Chickerell Neighbourhood Plan (2021) which requires that all development should demonstrate a high quality of design, including details and materials that are sympathetic to the character of the local area.

As well as the statutory time limit condition, I have imposed a condition requiring compliance with the relevant plans in the interests of certainty.

Due to the drainage constraints that relate to the site, the Council have suggested a condition requiring the submission and implementation of surface water drainage works associated with the appeal proposal. I have imposed such a condition, albeit in a modified form. Appeal Decision: APP/D1265/D/22/3312286

For the reasons given above, having regard to all matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.