Appeal 3336865

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed dormer on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area.

[address] is a residential street with a mix of property styles and types including bungalows, detached and semi-detached houses. There is no presiding style although some properties share similar design features with their neighbours. Dormer windows of varying size and design are common features on the street and surrounding roads.

The appeal property is a modest bungalow with an existing flat roof dormer to the front roof slope. The properties either side are of a different style, one has a large flat roof dormer on the front elevation and the other has a large dormer on the side roof slope.

The proposed dormer window would be larger than the one it replaces having a double gabled frontage and spanning a wider portion of the roof. There are no other examples of double gabled dormers in the immediate surrounding areas. Dormers tend to either have flat roofs or they are smaller dormers with pitched hipped or gable roofs.

The front of the property is clearly visible from the road. Although the property may be smaller than its neighbours the proposed extension would appear overly large in relation to the property itself. It would appear top heavy on the dwelling and its design is not sympathetic to the property or the wider area. Overall, it would appear as an incongruous addition to the property.

Whilst other examples in the area have been presented for my consideration by the appellant, none are of a similar scale or design or on a directly comparable style of property. The dormer is therefore considered to be out of character and harmful to the appearance of the property and the area.

The front porch proposed is of a suitable design and scale for the property. Whilst there would be a slightly awkward junction with the top of the porch and the lower part of the dormer this would have limited visual impact.

The appellant references a [name], however, I have not been provided with any relevant design guide for this area and therefore cannot take this into consideration.

The proposed dormer window is not considered to be of a sympathetic high quality design and it does not integrate, respect or complement the character of the area and would therefore be contrary to Policy E1 of the Test Valley Borough Local Plan. The National Planning Policy Framework requires the creation of well designed and beautiful places and this is not achieved by this proposal.

Increased energy efficiency is provided as a reason for the gable design of the proposed dormer with reference to “[name]” and the Council’s “[name]”. These documents have not been provided and are not planning policy. However, even if it could be demonstrated that there would be enhancements to the thermal efficiency of the dormer window they would not outweigh the design harms identified above.

The proposal conflicts with the development plan taken as a whole, and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.