Appeal 3342941

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issue is the effects of the development on the character and appearance of the area.

No. [site address] is a semi-detached dwelling, forming part of a linear run of properties situated on rising land above the village core of Galmpton. The properties have pleasant views over the village and out towards the rural context to the south and are understood to be of a circa mid C20 construction. No. 1B as other properties nearby, retains much of its original characteristics.

The proposal seeks to construct a two storey extension to the side of No. 1B. The extension would include a part dormer window to serve the upper floor and at ground floor level, the extension would extend forward of the existing building line with a lean-to roof.

From all that I observed during my site visit, it seems to me that whilst the principle of extending to the side of No. 1B maybe acceptable, the nature of the proposal before me, as a result of the dormer window design and the forward projection at the ground floor level, would result in the proposed addition appearing overly complicated in terms of its building mass and appearance, when compared to the relatively simple form and characteristics of No. 1B and the surrounding properties. The extension would appear incongruous as a result, and would unduly draw the eye, it would therefore be detrimental to the characteristics of No. 1B and that of the surrounding area.

Therefore, I find that the proposal would conflict with Policies DE1 and DE5 of the Torbay Local Plan 2012 to 2030, and Policies BH5 and BH6 of the Brixham Peninsula Neighbourhood Plan 2012 to 2030, which collectively, amongst other matters, seek to secure development that demonstrates good quality design, which respects the character and appearance of the surrounding area, and requires domestic extensions to not dominate or have other adverse effects on the character or appearance of the original property or any neighbouring properties, or on the street scene in general. The proposal would also conflict with paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2023, which, amongst other matters, requires development to be sympathetic to the surrounding built environment.

The appellant has made reference to an appeal decision at No.12 Hillrise in their Grounds of Appeal, however I have not been provided with any further detail of the nature of these proposals, and whether the matters involved are comparable to the appeal before me. In any case, I am required to determine this appeal on its own individual merits.

The appellant has also raised frustrations with the manner of engagement with the Council during their consideration of the proposal. However, this is not a matter that lies within the scope of this determination.

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