Appeal 3352904

The appeal is dismissed

The main issue is the effect of the appeal proposal upon the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site is located within a residential street comprising a variety of designs, but predominantly detached bungalows, chalet bungalows and two-storey houses with hipped or gable fronted pitched roofs; and some of which have had contemporary makeovers befitting of the coastal location, including balcony features.

It is located almost directly opposite the junction of [address] with [address] and can also be seen across an area of green space from [address] to the north east. Consequently, the appeal site is in a highly visible location.

Whilst in itself I can see no issue with the design of the dwelling proposed to be extended and altered, it cannot be considered in isolation and its built context must be taken into account.

I note from the proposed street scene that the total height of the dwelling, whilst no higher than that previously approved as a replacement dwelling (Ref. APP/22/00714/F), by virtue of its flat roof form combined with the tiered third storey would render it as incongruous within the street scene and would dominate both immediate neighbouring dwellings at 46 and [address]. [name] consider that the design and overall massing of the scheme would represent an inappropriate and dominant addition which would be harmful to the character and appearance of the area.

I have had regard to the examples cited by the appellants of other dwellings that have been permitted in a not too dissimilar form and whilst it is not generally for me to comment on the appropriateness or otherwise, I consider that no78 and its relationship with the pitched roof chalet bungalows either side reinforces my concerns. Therefore whilst this type of development has clearly been deemed acceptable in the past along with the planning permission yet to be implemented in full at [address], ultimately each case must be assessed on its own merits. However with regard to the examples at 79 and [address], they are in a slightly different situation in that they sit as a pair alongside no77, reading as one small group and, I hasten to add, with pitched roofs.

I accept that the proposed development would create an extended and modern family dwelling which would safeguard the amenity of all surrounding properties, but I find that by virtue of its boxy flat roof design the proposal would have a harmful effect upon the character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policy PP27 of the Poole Local Plan 2018 which states that a good standard of design is required in all new developments, including extensions and external alterations to existing buildings and that development will be permitted provided that (where relevant) it reflects or enhances local patterns of development in neighbouring buildings in terms of, amongst other things, height, scale, bulk and massing, including that of the roof.

Having regard to the above and all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal be dismissed.