Appeal 3345148

The appeal is Dismissed.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the street scene.

[address] is characterised by uniformly designed terraces of two storey dwellings from a limited range of designs and palette of materials. The dwellings have front facing two storey projecting bay windows and whilst some of the terraces include pitched gable roofs over these bay windows, within other rows of terraces the roofs over the bay windows are flat and sit at eaves level. This results in the roof slopes of these terraces being visually modest and fully hipped away from the street scene. Both individually and collectively the uniform siting and design of the front roof-slopes of the terraces make a strong contribution to the character and appearance of the street scene.

The appeal dwelling is located within a row of terraces with flat roofs over the projecting bay windows. Whilst some of the roofs include rooflights and/or solar panels, these sit close to and reflect the pitch of the roof slope. As a result, their visual impact on the uniformity of the terraces and the roofscape within the street scene is modest. Other changes to the front elevations of the buildings such as replacement windows and porch infilling, as well as the provision of on-site parking do not impact on the uniform roofscape.

Policy PCS23 of the Portsmouth Plan - [name] (2012) (PCS), requires new development to be well designed. It should be appropriate in scale, layout, appearance and materials in relation to its context. Similarly, paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2023 (the Framework), states that new development should be of a high standard and its design should be sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment. It should establish or maintain a strong sense of place whilst optimising the potential of the site.

The proposed dormer window would reflect the size and would align with the projecting bay windows at ground and first floor levels. However, the proposed dormer would have a gable roof and would project up to the ridge line and close to the eaves line of the host dwelling. It would be visually prominent within the street scene where it would dominate the front roof-slope of the appeal dwelling. It would also interrupt and be totally out of character with the front roofscape of the host and adjacent terraces. As a result the proposal would materially and unacceptably detract from the uniform character and appearance of the street scene.

This harm would outweigh the benefits from the appellant and their family that would result from the proposed additional accommodation and is not a matter that could be satisfactorily addressed through the imposition of conditions.

As stated by the appellant two front roof dormers have been approved in [address] and two in [address]. These dormer extensions highlight the prominent impact that dormer extensions can have on the character and appearance of the roof concerned and the wider roofscape. Accordingly, rather than setting a precedent for front dormers in the area these examples highlight the importance of assessing each proposal on its individual merits to establish whether it is acceptable and complies with the prevailing planning policies. [address] the two distinct roof designs make a very strong contribution to the character and appearance of the street scene, which is currently uninterrupted by dormer extensions.

I conclude that the proposed dormer would unacceptably harm the character and appearance of the street scene. It would therefore conflict with PCS Policy PCS23.