Appeal 3362374

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for loft conversion to create two bedrooms with side dormers and WC/Shower facilities at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref: 7-2024-29338, subject to the following conditions:

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

Notwithstanding the external materials shown on the approved plans, no development shall commence until details of the proposed materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved materials.

Except in respect of the external materials shown, the development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: location plan; 110-STA-01; 110-STA-02; 110-STA-03; 110-STA-04; 110-STA- 05; 110-STA-06.

The main issues in this appeal are: • the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and on the local area, and • the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the neighbours at [address], with particular regard to outlook.

The appeal property is a detached property on the south side of Green Road and within a predominantly residential area. The property has a hipped roof and a front bay extending over two storeys under a projecting gable. There are a number of houses of similar design whilst others have hipped roofs without the projecting front gable. There are several examples of dormers additions within the local area.

The proposal would introduce two flat roofed, side dormers and would build up the rear hipped elevation to create a gable end. The two dormers would be set well back from the front of the dwelling and would be set down from the roof ridge. Given the set back of the dormers as well as their set down from the roof ridge, I do not consider that they would appear overly dominant in form and scale in relation to the proportions of the main house and its roof. Their siting would also allow the front hipped roof and gable to maintain their vertical emphasis which is a characteristic of this property and of several of the neighbouring properties. In this regard the proposed development would also not harm the street scene and character and appearance of the local area.

The Council has raised a particular concern with the proposed materials for the roof dormers and I agree that the proposed use of contrasting materials to the existing roof materials would result in a visually discordant solution that would not respect the character or appearance of the existing dwelling. The Appellant has offered to accept a condition to reserve out the proposed external materials and I consider that this would be an acceptable way forward, particularly noting the Council’s references that if dormers were erected under permitted development, materials would be required to match the host dwelling.

I therefore conclude that subject to the imposition of a condition in respect of the proposed materials, the proposed development would respect the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and of the local area. There would be no conflict with Policy CS41 of the Bournemouth Local Plan: [name] (2012) ([name]) and the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) and in particular Section 12 both of which seek a high quality design which respects the local context.

The proposal would not meet some of the detailed guidance in the Council’s adopted [name]: A Design Guide for Householders (2008) ([name]). However, in view of my overall conclusion that the development would respect the character and appearance of the existing property and of the local area, in the particular circumstances of this case and taking into account the local context, I do not consider that this would on its own justify refusal of planning permission.

The neighbouring property at No [address] has an existing side dormer at roof level, facing towards the appeal property with windows in the side dormer. The outlook from that dormer at No 103 already faces towards the roof of the appeal property and I do not consider that the outlook from that dormer would be materially harmed as a result of the proposed development, particularly given the spacing between the properties and the absence of side facing windows in the proposed development at the appeal property.

I am satisfied that there would be no harm to the living conditions of No [address] to the west of the appeal property, given the proposed dormer would face on to the unextended roof form of that property, nor to the neighbours to the rear given the distance between properties.

I am therefore satisfied that there would be no material harm to the living conditions of the neighbours at [address] and the other immediate neighbours, with particular regard to loss of outlook or loss of privacy. There would be no conflict with Policy CS41 of the [name] and the Council’s adopted [name] and the Framework and in particular paragraph 135 all of which seek a high quality design which respects the amenities of existing and future occupiers.

In terms of conditions, and for the reasons set out above, I shall impose a condition to require further details of the proposed materials for the development hereby permitted to ensure that they complement the existing property. The approved plans should be listed for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of good planning. In order to be effective and given the nature of the development, it is my view that the condition relating to materials requires to be a pre-commencement condition. In accordance with Section 100ZA (5) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and The Town and Country Planning (Pre-Commencement Conditions) Regulations 2018, I have therefore requested and received the Appellant’s written agreement to the imposition of this condition.

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