Appeal 3351375

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the insertion of dormer roof extension including raising roof height of garage and single-storey element (to enable loft conversion for the creation of additional living accommodation) to existing dwelling at [site address] , Doddington, March, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/YR24/0400/F, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.

The main issue in this case is the effect of the proposed development on the streetscene and the character and appearance of the area.

The proposed alterations include raising the ridge of both the domestic link part and the garage, but retain a small height difference between the two, the garage element being a little higher. The link part would have its ridge joining the front slope of the main roof of the house, a little way above the eaves. The loft conversion would create additional living accommodation in both parts.

The appeal proposal would increase the ridge height of the garage to 5.87 metres, whilst the link would be have a ridge height of 5.64m. I note that there is an extant permission, given in 2023, for the insertion of a dormer roof extension including raising the roof height of the garage to 5.5m. That permission did not include any alteration of the domestic link to the garage. I also note, as I saw at my visit, that each of the houses on [name] has a forward wing with garages at ground floor, with first floor accommodation in the roof space, one utilising dormers windows.

In this context, I cannot see that raising the height of the garage and the link would be harmful to the streetscene and the character and appearance of the area. The host dwelling is substantial, and the proposed alterations would not create a dominant or incongruous feature, but would be compatible with the scale and character of the existing dwelling, and its neighbours.

I have consider all other matters raised including the comments from neighbours. These appear to primarily relate to decisions taken at earlier stages when the house at No. [site address] was first approved. The only implications for neighbours, particularly at No. 2, relate to the raising of the ridge and eaves heights. These are reasonably small increases with the roof pitches away from the that property, and there is a gap between 2 dwellings. I consider that there would be no significant additional impact on amenity of that neighbour. In respect of the proposed dormer windows, these would be hidden from No.2 and the other neighbours to the east.

For the reasons I have given, I consider that the appeal proposal is in conformity with the requirements of Policy LP16 – ‘Delivering and [name] across the District’, of Fenland Local Plan 2014. Therefore the appeal will be allowed.