Appeal 3363618

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a pitched roof dormer to front roof slope at [site address] , [site address] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/01770/FULHH, subject to the following

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 9217-A-001 ‘Location & [name], 9217-A-002 ‘Proposed Outline Plan’, 9217-A-200 01 ‘[name], Elevations & Sections’.

The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

For the sake of brevity and clarity I have taken the description of development from the Council’s decision notice.

The main issue of the appeal is the effect the development would have on the appearance and character of the host dwelling and surrounding area.

There is a variety of designs seen within the properties along [address], with a mixture of bungalows, detached and semi-detached properties. Many of these properties have dormers to their front or side roof slopes, that vary in form including some with pitched and cat-slide roofs.

The proposed front dormer, which would provide further light to the loft conversion granted consent under [name]. 24/01290, would not be excessive in width, given it would be set in a sufficient distance from the main roof verges. The proposed dormer would have a gabled roof form which responds well to the existing gabled roof. I note that the dormer would sit slightly forward of the existing roof to the bay window element, however, it would be set back from the eaves of the host dwelling and therefore would not have an adverse effect on the design or character of the appeal property.

Regarding the prominence of a dormer in the front roof slope, I do not consider this to be discordant within the surrounding area, as I noted that many properties west of the site, along [address], feature a mixture of pitched and cat-slide roof dormers to their front roof slopes. Furthermore, main roofs to properties themselves vary widely in form, as demonstrated by No. 25 ‘[address]’, immediately west of the appeal site. Whilst this property features a similar forward projecting bay window that extends across two floors, the front elevation features one large gable end roof which differs from the properties seen either side of it. Acknowledging the eclectic mixture of form and design along [address], I do not consider that the addition of the proposed front dormer would be an unacceptably prominent feature within the street scene.

The bay window and forward projecting first floor element is a feature which enhances the appearance of the property and contributes positively to the character of the area. However, I do not consider the dormer would be excessive in scale or bulk, nor would I consider it would unacceptably overwhelm the existing host property. The matching materials and pitched roof benefit the scheme as it will ensure the dormer assimilates with the existing character of the host dwelling.

On conclusion, the proposal would not have a harmful effect on the appearance and character of the host dwelling and surrounding area. The pitched roof dormer to the front slope accords with Policy SP 7 of the Tendring District Local Plan 2013- 2033 which, amongst other things, seeks to ensure that development promotes high standards of urban and architectural design which responds positively to the local context and character.

In addition to the standard three-year period implementation condition, which is a statutory requirement, it is necessary, in the interest of certainty, to define the plans with which the appeal scheme should accord. In order to protect the character and appearance of the surrounding area and the host dwelling, I am attaching a condition requiring materials used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development to match those used in the existing building.

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

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed.