Erection of a rear dormer roof extension (incorporating Juliet balconies)

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 28 October 2021 by Martin Andrews MA(Planning) BSc(Econ) DipTP & DipTP(Dist) MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 18 November 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/Y3615/D/21/3277046 27 Western Lea, West Horsley, Leatherhead KT24 6LG • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Simon Quincey against the decision of Guildford Borough Council. • The application, Ref. 21/P/00695, dated 24 March 2021 was refused by notice dated 14 May 2021. • The development proposed is the erection of a rear dormer roof extension (incorporating Juliet balconies). Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed extension on the character and appearance of the host dwelling. Reasons 3. The appeal dwelling is a semi-detached bungalow in Weston Lea, a cul-de-sac estate of buildings with essentially the same design and external materials. The appeal proposal is a roof extension in the form of a flat roofed dormer at the rear of the property. 4. The dormer would be set in only a modest distance from the sides of the roof slope and extend right up to the existing ridge and positioned only a minimal distance from the eaves. With these dimensions, in particularly its proximity to the ridge and eaves, the dormer would be disproportionately large for the roof plane and result in a top heavy appearance for the rear elevation. Nor would the fenestration, including the size and siting of the openings, read comfortably with the ground floor element of the rear elevation. 5. Accordingly, I consider the proposal to be of a poor design that would be unsympathetic to the existing scale and appearance of the host dwelling. As such, it would be in harmful conflict with Policy D1 (1) & (4) of the Guildford Borough Local Plan 2019 and the saved Design Code in Policy G5 of the Borough’s 2003 Local Plan. The appeal scheme would also be contrary to Government policy in Section 12: ‘Achieving Well-Designed Places’ of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021. Appeal Decision APP/Y3615/D/21/3277046 2 6. I acknowledge that No. 27 is in a corner position and with the proposed dormer on the rear elevation it would unlikely to be seen from the public realm and only to a limited extent from the gardens of adjoining neighbouring properties. 7. However, this does not offset the harm caused to the building itself. Moreover, if I were to allow the appeal it would undermine the distinctive character of Weston Lea which derives from its design integrity and the consistency of appearance of the buildings. It would also make it difficult for the Council, in all fairness, to resist similar proposals that would incrementally erode the environmental quality of Weston Lea. 8. I have taken account of the points raised in the grounds of appeal but nothing that I have read or seen at my visit is of sufficient weight to alter my conclusion that I should dismiss the appeal. Reference has been made to the extension at No. 17, but the view of that dormer’s flank, although limited, is one of a jarring feature in the street scene. Nor does it persuade me that the addition of a large dormer to a low profile building as exemplified in the appeal proposal would be a positive contribution to the character and appearance of Weston Lea. 9. For the reasons explained above the appeal is dismissed. Martin Andrews INSPECTOR