Appeal 3331556

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of a side elevation dormer window (retrospective) at [site address] , Bournemouth [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref. 7-2023-21825-G, dated 27 April 2023, and the plans submitted with it (300-208/01 & 03).

At my site visit, I saw that the development has been completed and I note that the application has been submitted retrospectively.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the surrounds, including the Meyrick Park and Talbot Woods Conservation Area (CA).

The appeal site comprises a two-storey, detached house with accommodation in the roof on [address]. There is an in-out drive to the front with gates and mature vegetation on the boundary with the highway.

Being situated in the CA, special attention must be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a Conservation Area, as required by section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Paragraph 199 of the Framework states that when considering the impact of a development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. _________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________

The CA Appraisal states that the key characteristics essentially derive from its topological features allied to its historic evolution in the 19th and 20th centuries. The most striking feature of the present day conservation area is the distinctive sub-division of the area into two halves: the open green spaces and wooded areas of the south set against the fully developed and populated north.

This part of [address] contains large houses set in substantial plots, and well planted with trees and shrubs. Within this context the proposal itself has only localised effects, being apparent from the public domain over the mature hedgerows when approached along [address] from [address], and from a small number of other buildings and curtilages in the immediate area.

The scheme is modest in scale, with the pitched roof matching others elsewhere on the property. It is stand-alone, set down from the main ridge line, and its impact is further reduced by its position towards the rear of the flank roof slope. Consequently, I consider that it does not detrimentally imbalance the building as a whole.

I saw at my visit that a portion of the pitched roof over the dormer window partially wraps around the base of the adjacent chimney stack. This arrangement is minor in scale and I find that it does not appear as a contrived design solution. As such, although the appeal scheme would result in a change to the side elevation of the dwelling, to my mind it would not represent an incongruous or intrusive form of development.

Taken in the round, I am of the view that the proposal would not materially harm the character and appearance of the surrounds, including the CA. It would accord with Policy 4.4 of the Bournemouth District Wide Local Plan (2002), Policies CS39 and CS41 of the Bournemouth Local Plan: [name] 2012, the [name] and the Council's adopted [name]: A Design Guide for Householders (2008). Cumulatively these seek to secure new development of acceptable scale and appearance, which conserves and enhances the significance and character of the historic environment. It would also be consistent with the advice in the Framework, which states that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, and it is desirable for new proposals to make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

I have considered the imposition of conditions in light of advice in Planning Policy Guidance and the Framework. The development is complete and therefore the standard time limit and plans condition are no longer necessary. I am satisfied that no conditions are required.

In respect of the above and all other matters raised, I allow the appeal.