Hip to gable and rear dormer loft conversion

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 29 March 2019 by J L Cheesley BA(Hons) DIPTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 12 April 2019 Appeal Ref: APP/J1535/D/19/3220993 37 Forest Edge, Buckhurst Hill IG9 5AE • 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 Lee Harman against the decision of Epping Forest District Council. • The application Ref EPF/2935/18 was refused by notice dated 20 December 2018. • The development proposed is hip to gable and rear dormer loft conversion. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. I consider the main issue to be the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling. Reasons 3. The appeal dwelling comprises a semi-detached dwelling of traditional design with a two-storey side projection that has a lower ridge height to a side hipped roof than the main ridge. The main roof has a side hip adjacent to this side projection. The proposal includes a hip to gable side extension to the roof of the side projection. The proposed rear dormer would be staggered across the two roof slopes creating a wide dormer which would bisect the roof with two prominent flanks. 4. From my observations, I consider the proposal would appear as a bulky incongruous addition that would not be in keeping with the design of the roof, particularly where the proposed section of the dormer on the main roof would overlap the existing hip of the roof to allow for the proposed bedroom. This would not complement the existing design of the roof and would unacceptably overwhelm the roof of the dwelling. This would be to the detriment of the traditional character and appearance of the dwelling. 5. Whilst I appreciate that the proposed rear dormer would not be visible from the streetscene, it would be visible from a number of properties to the rear. In reaching my conclusion, I have had regard to all matters raised, including examples of dormers in the vicinity of the appeal site. None are directly Appeal Decision APP/J1535/D/19/3220993 2 comparable in terms of dominance and design to the proposal before me, which I have determined on its individual merits. For the reasons stated above, I conclude that the proposal would have an unacceptably adverse effect on the character and appearance of the dwelling. 6. For the above reasons, the proposal would be contrary to saved Policy DBE10 in the Epping Forest Local Plan (1998) and Alterations, where it seeks to ensure that residential extensions complement and, where appropriate, enhance the appearance of the existing dwelling. At paragraph 213 the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) states that due weight should be given to existing policies according to their degree of consistency with the Framework. I consider that saved Policy DBE10 is broadly consistent with the Framework where the Framework seeks to ensure good design. 7. I have been referred to emerging Policy DM9 in the Epping Forest District Local Plan Submission Version (December 2017). As this may be subject to future amendment, I have only attributed this policy moderate weight in my determination of this appeal. J L Cheesley INSPECTOR