Appeal 6004829

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission Ref: 22/1375/FUL (Single storey side extension, removal of chimney stack, conversion of roof space to habitable use to include a front and rear dormer, 2 roof lights, extension to vehicular hardstanding to front, installation of vehicular hardstanding to side, installation of boundary wall to rear, porch to front with alteration to fenestration) to allow for ridge height and pitch alterations and changes to fenestration, at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/1794/VAR, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

At my visit it was apparent that works to the property had already commenced and that the original planning permission was therefore extant.

The appellant seeks to carry out alterations to the appeal property of a different design to that approved, specifically to increase the pitch of the roof, and to amend the fenestration within the east facing elevation.

The main issues are: • the effect of the revised design upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area; and • the effect of the revised design on the living conditions of occupiers of the neighbouring properties with particular regard to privacy

The appeal property is a detached single storey bungalow. It is constructed from red brick to its walls above a rendered plinth, and has a hipped pitched roof finished in grey-brown tiles. The property was constructed in the latter part of the 20th century and is situated to the eastern side of [address], which houses a number of similar properties.

[address] is a short section of highway which connects the main road known as [address], with a substantial estate of bungalow properties, of similar design to the appeal property, which lie on sloping land to the south and west below the appeal property. At my visit it was apparent that a number of these properties had converted their roof spaces, either with roof dormers, with rooflights or by converting hipped roofs into full gables.

The properties which lie to the west side of [address] occupy a raised position relative to the appeal property and its neighbours on [address] and are in the main two-storey in height, either in the form of full two-storey accommodation, or mixed two-storey elements incorporating dormers to their upper floor. The area therefore has the character of an established, residential neighbourhood, where dormers and accommodation within roof spaces are common.

The appeal property received full planning approval1 for the conversion of its roof space into additional accommodation in September 2022. This included the installation of roof dormers, sloping roof windows together with removal of the chimney stack, vehicular parking areas and fenestration changes. Subsequently, the appellant sought non-material amendments (NMA) to this approval, to increase the pitch of the roof angle from around 40 degrees to 43 degrees. All other elements of the proposal remained as previously approved. The Council approved the NMA application.

Having examined the evidence before me, and at my visit, I find that the drawings submitted with the variation of condition application give clear indication of the heights that would result from the change in the roof pitch from 40 degrees to 43 degrees. I note that this change has already been approved by the Council via approval of the NMA application on 8 November 2023. Further, whilst the Council may consider that there have been differences in the consistency of drawn information, the submitted drawings give definitive dimensions via a datum from top of wall plate, which would provide certainty in the height of the amended roof pitch being proposed, and which could be enforced if required. 1 22/1375/FUL

The visual effect of the change in the roof pitch would be small within the context of the street scene and would be acceptable due to the retention of the hipped roof to the principal street facing elevation. Whilst the roof dormers would be more prominent, they are a common feature within the area, including within [address], and would therefore be acceptable. The proposed changes to the fenestration within the east facing elevation are minor and would also be acceptable. I therefore find that neither the change in roof pitch or the roof dormers as proposed would harm the character or appearance of the surrounding area.

Accordingly, for the above reasons I conclude that the appeal proposal would not represent poor design or be unsympathetic to the character or appearance of the surrounding area. It follows, therefore, that I find it would not be contrary to Policy D1 of the East Devon Local Plan (2016) ( the Local Plan) or with Policy EB2 of the Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan (the NP), which require, among other things, that development to provide a high quality of design which respects the design character and features of the surrounding area.

The appeal proposal generally follows the form of that approved within the original application 22/1375/FUL, with the exception of the roof pitch and amendment to the ground floor fenestration in the east facing elevation.

Having examined the evidence before me and at my visit, I find that neither the amendment to the roof pitch, or amendments to the ground floor fenestration in the east facing elevation, would have any harmful effects on the privacy of occupiers of neighbouring properties, either on [address] or on [address], which is situated at a significantly higher ground level. The proposed dormers in the roof are of a similar design and position to those within the approved application, being adjusted to suit the amended roof pitch. I find the condition on the original approval, which restricts the extent and level of opening lights within the roof dormer windows, and which requires the inclusion of obscure glazing, would ensure the privacy of occupants of neighbouring properties is maintained.

Accordingly, for the above reasons I conclude that the appeal proposal would not represent poor design or be harmful to the privacy of occupiers of neighbouring properties within the surrounding area. It follows, therefore, that I find it would not be contrary to Policy D1 of the Local Plan or with Policy EB2 of the NP, which require, among other things, that development provides a high quality of design which respects the design character and features of the surrounding area, and which does not adversely affect the amenity of occupiers of adjoining residential properties.

I have had regard to the correspondence received at the consultation stage in my determination of the appeal. Whilst there were comments submitted at this stage in relation to the presence of a Juliet balcony within the upper floor of the east facing elevation, this element of the application was withdrawn, and is not part of this appeal. I have therefore disregarded comments made in relation to this element in my decision.

By allowing this appeal a new planning permission is created. The Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) makes clear that decision notices for the grant of planning permission under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, should also restate the conditions imposed on the earlier permission that continue to have effect. I have, therefore, re-imposed all those conditions that I consider relevant and in accordance with the Framework and the PPG.

In addition to the standard time limit for implementation, in the interests of certainty, I have attached a condition specifying the approved plans.

A condition controlling the installation of obscure glazing and restricting the height of opening lights in the dormer windows is required, in the interest of protecting the amenity of neighbouring residents.

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the appeal proposal would accord with the development plan, when read as a whole, and that there are no material considerations, that would justify determining other than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal should be allowed.

I will therefore allow the appeal and grant a new planning permission, restating those undisputed conditions that are still subsisting and capable of taking effect.