Appeal 3328529

The appeal is dismissed.

An application for costs was made by [name] 24:7 Ltd against Tewkesbury Borough Council. This application is the subject of a separate

The main issues are the effect of the proposed development upon: • the character and appearance of the area; and, • the living conditions of occupiers of [address], with particular regard to outlook and privacy.

The appeal site relates to a recently completed 2 storey detached house. The design matches that of its neighbour, No 9A. The rear of the house projects back at ground floor level across the full width of the house and has a flat roof creating a stepped rear elevation that breaks up its mass. At first floor level there is a pitched roof above one of the bedroom windows which projects out from the roof plane.

The proposed first floor extension would be above the rear projecting ground floor element and its roof would join that of the main house creating a catslide section of roof. The rear dormer would extend across most of the roof width and as such would dominate it. The stepped appearance of the rear elevation and the symmetry with No 9A would be lost. In combination, the rear extension and dormer would appear bulky and unsympathetic to the original design of the house and its neighbour. I note that No 15 has a rear dormer but it does not extend across most of the roof, as is the case with the appeal proposal. Elsewhere in the area surrounding the appeal site the rear roofscape remains mainly unaltered.

Although the proposed development would not be visible from the street, because of the configuration of roads nearby it would be visible from the rear of adjacent properties and houses on [address] and [address] from which it would appear incongruous and thus harm the character of the area and conflict with Policy SD14 of the Gloucester, Cheltenham and [name] 2011-2031 (2017), Policy RES10 of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan 2011-2031 (2022) and Policy LC1 of the Alderton Neighbourhood Development Plan 2011-2031 (2018) (ANDP) which require development to reflect or complement the design of the existing dwelling and respect the character and appearance of surrounding development. Policy H1 of the ANDP referred to in the Council’s reason for refusal deals with new housing and is not relevant to the proposal.

The reason for refusing the application did not specify how the proposed development would impact on the amenity of neighbouring occupiers of No 11. However, according to the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting at which the application was considered, it was brought for their determination because Alderton Parish Council objected to the proposal on the grounds of its overbearing impact upon neighbours, in addition to parking and design concerns. Also, during the Planning Committee meeting a member commented that the original application for the house restricted how far the windows on the first floor could extend out, to maintain the privacy of neighbouring properties. I therefore consider outlook and privacy to be the main concerns regarding the effect of the proposed development upon living conditions.

The appeal property’s rear building line extends further into the garden than that of is neighbour No 11. Consequently, its side wall is visible from the rear windows and garden of No 11. Also, No 11 has windows on its ground floor side elevation that face directly on to the side wall of the appeal property. From these windows the appeal property will already obscure views and thus have an overbearing effect to some degree. The proposed rear extension would add mass to the side elevation but not to the extent that it would significantly further reduce views from No 11’s side and rear windows or garden, or appear more overbearing, particularly given the gap between the 2 houses.

Rear windows on the first floor of the appeal property already enable some overlooking into neighbouring gardens. The proposed development would not significantly increase overlooking into gardens either side of the appeal site, and the distance to the garden and house at [address] which backs on to the appeal site is enough to ensure there would be no loss of privacy to its occupants. Representations also raised concern regarding overshadowing. The orientation of the house and neighbouring properties is such that their rear windows and gardens receive sunlight for much of the day and the extent to which that would be reduced by the proposed development would be minimal. Overall, I conclude on this main issue that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of occupiers of No 11 and would not therefore conflict with Policy RES10 of the Tewkesbury Borough Plan 2011-2031 (2022) which requires that development should not have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties.