For a hip to gable alteration of the roof, dormer additions to front and rear

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 28 August 2025 by C Hall BSc MPhil MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 04 September 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/L2250/D/25/3366711 7 Ians Walk, Hythe, Kent CT21 5TT • 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 & Mrs M Burke against the decision of Folkestone & Hythe District Council. • The application Ref. is 25/0544/FH. • The development proposed is for a hip to gable alteration of the roof, dormer additions to front and rear. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a hip to gable alteration of the roof, dormer additions to front and rear at 7 Ians Walk, Hythe, Kent CT21 5TT in accordance with the terms of the application Ref. 25/0544/FH, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: location plan, 24037MB-PP-(03)00, 24037MB-PP-(03)01, 24037MB-PP-(03)03, 24037MB-PP-(04)01, 24037MB-PP-(04)02, 24037MB-PP- (04)03, 24037MB-PP-(04)04, 24037MB-PP-(13)02. 3) Notwithstanding the approved plans, no occupation of the development shall occur until details of an obscure glazed window to serve the dressing room shall have been submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. The window shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and thereafter maintained. Preliminary Matter 2. At my site visit I saw that the development has commenced on a rear dormer, albeit that it appears to be wider than that proposed; I have dealt with the appeal based on the plans before me. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the dwelling and local area. Reasons Appeal Decision APP/L2250/D/25/336671 1 __________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ 2 4. The appeal site comprises a semi-detached bungalow with off-street parking on the driveway to the front. The local neighbourhood is predominantly residential in nature and consists of properties of varying scale and design. 5. I acknowledge that the rear dormer window would be a fairly substantial development within the roofslope of the host dwelling. Nevertheless, the plans indicate that the element would be set within the body of the roof; marginally below the main ridgeline, above the eaves and with the sides set away from the gable end and party wall with the adjacent property. Taken together with the numerous other dormer windows that are clearly visible from the appeal site, I am of the view that the scheme would not appear top-heavy or detract from the character of the setting. 6. The dormer would be constructed with a window above the ground floor patio door, which gives a degree of balance to the fenestration. I appreciate that the absence of an opening to serve the dressing room is regrettable and would result in a bland section of tile hanging. To this end, I consider that a condition requiring a small obscure glazed window would address the issue, and the appellants have indicated that they would be willing to install such a casement. 7. The Council does not object to the hip-to-gable extension or the front dormer, and I have no reason to disagree. 8. I therefore conclude that the scheme would assimilate with the character and appearance of the dwelling and local area. It would meet with Policies HB1 and HB8 of the Folkestone & Hythe Places and Policies Local Plan (September 2020), which seek to secure new development of acceptable scale and appearance. Conditions 9. I have considered the imposition of conditions in light of advice in Planning Policy Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework. In addition to the standard implementation condition, a condition requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the submitted drawings is reasonable and necessary for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. Details of a window to serve the dressing room would enhance the appearance of the rear dormer. Conclusion 10. Having regard to the foregoing and all remaining matters, the appeal is allowed. C Hall INSPECTOR