Appeal 3361523

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a hipped to gable roof extension with raising of roof pitch, addition of two storey side extension and alterations to existing rear fenestration at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/24/0707, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: SPRING/24/01; SPRING/24/02; SPRING/24/03; and SPRING/24/05.

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.

I have used the Council’s description of development in the above banner heading as it concisely and accurately describes the proposal.

The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the host dwelling.

The appeal concerns a single storey bungalow which was constructed as a pair with the adjoining bungalow, Shadycombe. The dwellings are attached by way of a single storey flat roof garage to the side of the appeal property, and a newly constructed extension to the side of Shadycombe. Shadycombe also has a large existing extension on its north eastern side and at the time of my site visit, further extensions were under constructed.

The appeal property occupies an irregular shaped corner plot, with Instow, a two storey semi-detached dwelling fronting onto Green Road, lying to the west. The dwelling is reasonably well screened from adjoining roads by hedging and other planting and is set back a reasonable distance from both road frontages.

The proposal involves replacing the simple hipped roof of the dwelling which has a pitch of 37.5 degrees, with a gable ended roof structure with a pitch of 45 degrees. The overall ridge height of the dwelling would be raised by about 0.85m, resulting in a chalet style dwelling. The new roof would also extend over the proposed side extension which would have a width of 3.5m, and a depth equivalent to that of the main part of the host dwelling.

The main parties have referred to a previous application 1 on the site for a roof conversion and side extension. This application was approved in 2018 but was not implemented. Whilst no increase in the height of the dwelling was proposed under that application, the approved extension was of a similar scale and form to the current proposal, with dormer windows proposed on the front and rear elevations.

The proposal would result in a chalet style dwelling, however the proposed extensions would be well integrated with the host dwelling and would respect its original scale and form. The most significant increase in scale and bulk would be derived from the use of first floor roof space as habitable accommodation, rather than the modest increase to the footprint of the dwelling.

The main bulk of the roof would be over the side extension on the southern side of the dwelling and would not be particularly prominent when viewed from outside of the site. The main part of the roof would slope away from the [site address] frontage and the relatively small increase in height would not be harmful to the street scene. The proposed extensions to the dwelling would be viewed in the same context as both Shadycombe which has also been heavily extended albeit at ground floor level, and Instow, which is of a full two-storey in height.

I therefore find that the proposal would be appropriate in terms of its scale, form and massing and accordingly, would not result in disproportionate additions to the dwelling. Furthermore, the dwelling would continue to sit comfortably within its well screened plot, and I am satisfied that no significant harm would be caused to the character and appearance of the wider area, including the rural setting of the lane.

I therefore conclude that the proposed development would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling. It would comply with Policies DM25 and DM28 of the Lewes District Local Plan Part 2 Site Allocations and Development Management Policies 2020 (DMP) and the [name] Note. Together, and amongst other things, these policies and guidance seek to secure high quality design which respects and contributes to local character and distinctiveness and for the scale, form, height, massing and proportions of development to be compatible with existing buildings, 1 LPA ref. LW/18/0516 building lines, roofscapes and skylines and to complement and enhance the character and appearance of the host building.

I acknowledge that ‘Baldings’ a [name] listed building lies to the north-east of the site. This property is separated from the appeal site by Shadycombe and an access road. The main bulk of the proposed extension would be on the southern side of the host dwelling, further away from the listed building. Owing to the physical and visual separation between the appeal property and the listed building, I am satisfied the setting of Baldings would not be harmed as a result of the proposed development. Furthermore, I note that the Council did not raise any concerns in relation to this matter.

The proposed development would be set in from the external boundaries of the site and would not result in any significant loss of light or outlook to neighbouring residential dwellings. The boundaries of the site are screened and the proposed first floor window on the rear elevation of the extension would be angled away from the main rear elevation of Instow. Whilst there would be windows and a Juliet balcony on the southern flank elevation, these windows would look over the side garden of the host dwelling and towards the highway beyond and would not result in material overlooking of the adjacent dwelling.

In addition to the standard implementation condition, the approved plans condition is imposed for certainty. A condition controlling the use of materials is necessary to protect the character and appearance of the dwelling and the local area.

For the reasons given above and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that this appeal should be allowed.