Appeal 3326211

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host property and locality.

The appeal property is a semi-detached bungalow with a front dormer symmetrical to its neighbour. It is within a mid-density estate of varied, bungalow, chalet and two storey homes, and the area is of an established residential nature with a pleasing understated appearance. The proposal is as described above.

The semi-detached pair of homes including the appeal dwelling is mirrored by another pair alongside which adds to the sense of regularity to the scene along the street. The appeal property is also prominent from [name] as it sits at the end of that road. In this context it is important to carefully consider any change to the front elevation. The planned dormer extension would to my eye be an awkward bulky addition not least because it would project forward of its abutting dormer element and also run down the roof appreciably closer to the gutter line. In my opinion it would look contrived, out of proportion and incongruous both in the immediate context and the wider scene. Regrettably the dormer extension would simply look ill-advisedly ‘stuck on’, unbalanced and alien in the streetscene.

Policy D1 of the Fareham Local Plan 2037 is relevant. Amongst other matters, this policy seeks to secure development with high design quality drawing suitably upon: context, existing built form, and the general character of a building and locality. In all the circumstances I conclude that the appeal scheme would conflict with this planning policy. It would also run contrary to the relevant aesthetic objectives of the Council’s Design Guidance Supplementary Guidance Document albeit I do recognise that this publication cannot cover every eventuality.

I do understand the Appellant’s wish to improve internal space and I know that dialogue has taken place with the Council. I note the reference to [address]. I do not know the full planning history to this site, the immediate and wider context is different, and I would say that I am not convinced that its dormer scheme should be held up as a benchmark for good design locally. In my mind it would not create any sort of precedent and in any event, I have to assess the current proposal on its own merits.

I have carefully considered all the points raised by the Appellant but these matters do not outweigh the concerns which I have in relation to the main issue identified above.

I confirm that the National Planning Policy Framework has been considered; the Council’s policy which I cite mirrors relevant objectives within that document.

For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal proposal would have unacceptable effects on the character and appearance of the host property and the locality. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.