Appeal 6000889

The appeal is dismissed.

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.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and surrounding area.

The appeal property comprises a detached two-storey dwelling positioned in the north-eastern corner of a generous plot. Aside from the neighbouring [name], the area is residential with a mixture of detached two-storey dwellings and chalet bungalows which vary in style and design. Although some of the dwellings are of substantial width and contain small forward projections, the prevailing character is of dwellings that are arranged over two storeys and of similar height and scale.

The Swindon Borough Council Residential Extensions and Alterations Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (2011) indicates that extensions should be in scale and proportion with a shape and mass that is in character with the existing dwelling. Moreover, it provides detailed guidance with regards to roof alterations and extensions advising that changing the roof shape, pitch or raising the ridge height will not normally be permitted, front extensions that span the width of the dwelling are generally unacceptable and side extensions should be set back from the principle elevation with a ridge height below the original dwelling.

The proposal includes the raising of the ridge height to provide a third storey of accommodation which would be inconsistent with the prevailing character of the area. Together with the dormer windows and gable end design, which would be different to the existing front gable design, the roof would appear top heavy. This would be accentuated by the wide side extensions that would sit flush with the existing front elevation. Furthermore, the front extension would span the full width of the extended dwelling which would introduce a dominant addition to the front of the dwelling adding to the overall bulk and mass of the proposal.

The different elements of the proposal would therefore not comply with the SPD and would result in a substantial change to the size and appearance of the dwelling, notwithstanding that the existing design of the appeal dwelling differs from neighbouring properties and sits within a larger plot than elsewhere in the locality. [name] acknowledge that the SPD is intended as guidance, the cumulative effect of the proposal would appear as an incongruous addition to the dwelling and would not reflect the cohesive scale and form that is characteristic of dwellings in the area.

The proposal would therefore have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the appeal dwelling and surrounding area and would conflict with Policy DE1 of the Swindon Local Plan (2015) which seeks high quality design by assessing proposals against specific design principles including layout and form, specifically in respect of among other things, scale and massing. For the same reasons, the proposal would conflict with Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework which requires development to be sympathetic to local character.

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

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