Appeal 6000529

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for rear roof space dormer at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/01210/HOUS, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

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: Proposed site plan 278/200, Proposed first floor 278/202, Proposed roof plan 278/203, Existing north and proposed west elevations 278/204, Proposed south and east elevations 278/205, Proposed section B 278/206.

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.

In the interests of clarity, I have taken the description of development in the heading above from the original application form.

The appellants statement outlines that revised plans were submitted to the South Downs National Park Authority (the Authority) prior to the determination of the planning application. The Authority did not refer to these revised plans in either the officer delegated report nor the decision notice.

If this appeal were to be determined on the basis of the revised plans there would be a risk that parties wishing to comment on the proposed changes would be deprived of the opportunity to do so. In this regard and in the interests of fairness, I have therefore determined this appeal on the basis of the original drawings.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of adjacent occupiers, with particular regards to privacy.

The appeal site is a detached chalet bungalow with front, side and rear garden spaces and driveway. The dwelling is located along a stretch of [site address] which is characterised by an eclectic mix of styles of dwellings varying greatly in size, form, spacing and appearance.

I was able to observe a number of alterations and extensions to properties in the locality during my site visit. Immediately adjacent to the appeal site I noted rear facing flat roof dormers to two semi-detached bungalows. On Forest Road I noted front facing dormers to several properties.

The proposed dormer would be set in slightly from the roof edge and would form a very modest addition to the host property’s roof space. Although the proposed dormer would contain two windows, these would be set in from the plot’s side boundaries.

However, the dormer windows would face land to the rear of [address] which sits perpendicular to the appeal property. The boundary between the appeal site and [address] is comprised of a 1.[address] boarded fence and the garden space in this area is given over to a path, vegetable garden, greenhouse and shed.

The land to the rear of [address] is comprised of a driveway, outbuildings, vegetable garden and grass. I was able to view the upper storey windows in the rear elevation of [address] from the garden space of the appeal property. Both properties are in the built-up extent of the village where some degree of mutual overlooking would be expected.

The plans indicates that the dormer would serve a bedroom. The appellants statement contains an image taken from an existing rooflight in the approximate location of the proposed dormer detailing the current level of overlooking into the neighbouring property. I was able to observe these existing views during my site visit.

Whilst the windows serving the dormer would be marginally forward of the existing rooflights, the resultant view into the garden areas and first floor windows of [address] would not be substantially different than the existing situation.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the proposed dormer would not cause material harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of [address] in respect of loss of privacy. The development therefore complies with the provisions of Policies SD5 and SD31 of the South Downs Local Plan and Paragraph 135(f) of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which seek, amongst other things, to protect the amenity of neighbouring occupiers.

In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed conditions requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the plans and the use of matching materials, in the interests of protecting the character and appearance of the area.

I have not imposed the Authority’s suggested condition requiring the provision of a bat or bird box within the planning unit to meet the requirements of policies SD2 and SD9. In these circumstances I have not been provided with sufficiently convincing evidence that the condition would be necessary to mitigate harm.

I have not imposed the appellant’s suggested condition relating to seeking approval for the size and position of the windows within the proposed dormer. [name] have found no harm from the proposal, such a condition is not necessary.

For the reasons given above, having considered the development plan as a whole and all other relevant material considerations, including the Framework, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.