Appeal 6002106

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for construction of rear pitched roof dormer window to replace egress rooflight, installation of two rooflights over living room and solar panels over ground floor bedroom at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/02141/HOUS, 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: 1407 S1 01; and 1407 GA 10 [name].

The external materials of the rear pitched roof dormer window and rooflights hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling.

The appeal site is within the South Downs National Park (SDNP). Therefore, section 245 of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, places a statutory duty upon me to seek to further the statutory purposes of the SDNP, which includes conserving and enhancing the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the designated area. In making my decision, I have had regard to this statutory duty.

The appeal relates to a planning application that was not determined by the Authority within the prescribed period. However, the Authority has provided me with a report which sets out that it would have granted planning permission, subject to conditions, had it determined the planning application. I have not been presented with any substantive evidence to demonstrate that there is any conflict with the relevant policies of the development plan. My assessment of the submitted evidence and site visit observations do not lead me to a different conclusion to the Authority, and as such, there are no main issues to consider. Moreover, I am satisfied that the proposed development would conserve the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the designated area.

The Authority has provided a list of conditions that it suggests should be applied in the eventuality that the appeal were to be allowed. I have assessed those with reference to the advice in the National Planning Policy Framework and Planning Practice Guidance.

In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed a condition specifying the approved plans as this provides certainty.

A condition requiring the use of matching materials for the dormer window and rooflights is necessary to maintain the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area. I have amended the wording from that proposed by the Authority for clarity.

The Authority suggested a condition requiring the rooflights to be fitted with low transmittance glazing to mitigate the impact of the proposed development on light pollution and to respect the [name] within the SDNP. However, the Authority has not provided sufficient justification to demonstrate that low transmittance glazing is necessary in this particular case. The proposed development would result in the removal of one existing rooflight at first-floor level and the addition of two smaller rooflights at ground-floor level. Therefore, the net additional rooflight area and associated light transmittance would be minimal. For these reasons the proposal would respect the [name] within the SDNP. Therefore, this condition is unnecessary.

I conclude that the appeal should be allowed and planning permission granted.