Rear Extension, internal alts and new rooms in a roof
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Policy Weight
Extensions
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 23 January 2024
by K Reeves BA (Hons) MA MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 04 APRIL 2024
Appeal Ref: APP/D1265/D/23/3329072
44 Sandy Lane, Upton, Dorset BH16 5LX
• The appeal is made under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as
amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Mr Dan Rimini against the decision of Dorset Council.
• The application Ref P/HOU/2023/00474, dated 25 January 2023, was refused by notice
dated 14 July 2023.
• The development proposed was originally described as “Rear Extension, internal alts
and new rooms in a roof.”
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Preliminary Matters
2. The description of development in the banner heading above is taken from the
application form. The Council’s description and that used in the appeal form is
to ‘Construct new higher roof with accommodation within, construct rear
extension and internal alterations. Construct new garden store.’ This better
describes the proposal before me.
3. A revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published
on 19 December and updated on 20 December 2023. Whilst this made certain
revisions to aspects of national planning policy, the provisions in respect of the
matters relied on by the main parties are unchanged. Therefore, I did not need
to consult with the main parties regarding the revised Framework and in
determining this appeal, I have had regard to the most recent version.
Main Issue
4. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and
appearance of the area.
Reasons
5. Sandy Lane is a residential street in the town of Upton. The appeal site is on
the side of the road predominated by bungalows. The opposite side of the road
mainly comprises two storey buildings punctuated by bungalows. The dwelling
has been subject to a previous alteration in the 1980s following the granting of
planning permission for a flat roof dormer to create two bedrooms in the roof
space1.
1 Planning application reference 6/80/783
Appeal Decision APP/D1265/D/23/3329072
2
6. The site sits in a row of three bungalows that, despite their differing roof
heights and forms, share similar characteristics in terms of their individual front
door, bay windows and hipped roof all facing on to Sandy Lane. The proposal
would see the front door and bay windows retained in their current positions on
the building. However, the hipped roof would be replaced with a gable roof and
the gable end would face on to the road instead. This would result in a marked
visual change within the street scene.
7. However, there are other examples of properties along Sandy Lane that have
gable ends facing on to the road. Although I acknowledge that they are dotted
along the road and not a predominant feature of the street scene, it also needs
to be recognised that the street scene has a notably diverse range of house
styles. As such, a proposed change of the roof shape from a hipped roof to a
gable roof would not form an incongruent change in the street scene on its
own, and therefore, in principle, this alteration may not materially harm the
character and appearance of the area.
8. However, the existing footprint of this property results in the proposal
presenting a very substantial width to the gable end. Furthermore, as a result
of raising the eaves level, a significant gap between the top of the windows on
the ground floor and that level would also be established. While the orientation
of properties here varies, a prevailing feature of the gable roofed dwellings on
Sandy Lane is that the width of the gable is substantially narrower than that
proposed here. Furthermore, the window lines sit tightly in relation to the
eaves, setting out a compact and contained character to the dwellings. Here,
that spacing would be materially enlarged, which, along with the significant
gable width would create a massing and bulk materially in contrast to its
immediate neighbours and to other similar gable fronted properties along the
street. Moreover, changes in the external wall material generally takes place
above eaves level, typically within the confines of the gable. This proposal
would see the external wall material change at a level significantly lower than
the eaves level. As such, the form and material finish of the proposal would not
be in keeping with similar built form on Sandy Lane.
9. Overall, I consider that the proposed changes to the front elevation and
associated increased ridge and eaves heights, would result in an incongruous
form, out of character even within the relatively mixed nature of the bungalow
development along Sandy Lane. As such, I consider it would be harmful to the
character and appearance of the area.
10. I have been referred to numerous planning permissions that have been granted
in relation to properties on Sandy Lane2. For some, such as 18 Sandy Lane, it
would appear there have been similar proposed changes from hipped to gable
form. However, I have not found an issue with the hipped roof of the appeal
dwelling being changed to a gable roof and the referenced permissions do not
sufficiently demonstrate a proliferation of wide gable ends and high eaves
levels on Sandy Lane. 28 Yarrells Lane, which was also noted by the Council,
sits within a corner plot, orientated to a road running perpendicular to Sandy
Lane, while 68 Sandy Lane, where eaves levels would also appear to have been
raised, sits within a different context, with adjacent two-storey properties.
While this is not a comprehensive review of all possible developments, I have
considered these schemes, and was able to view the properties along Sandy
2 Including planning application references P/HOU/2022/03608, P/HOU/2023/01160, 6/2021/0024, 6/2020/0579
and 6/2011/0170
Appeal Decision APP/D1265/D/23/3329072
3
Lane within their context during my site visit. Overall, I consider that these
permissions do not justify the harm that would be caused by the proposed
development and, in any event, I am considering the appeal on its own
individual merits.
11. For these reasons, I conclude that the proposed development would harm the
character and appearance of the area. Consequently, the proposal would
conflict with Policy D of the Purbeck Local Plan Part 1 (Adopted November
2012), which seeks, in part, for development to positively integrate with its
surroundings. The proposal would also conflict with the Framework, insofar as
it seeks to ensure that development is visually attractive as a result of good
architecture and layout, and sympathetic to local character, including the
surrounding built environment.
Other Matters
12. The proposed development would result in improved living conditions for the
occupiers of the dwelling. However, this is a private benefit that does not
outweigh the conflict with the development plan identified above.
13. Neither the Council nor the appellant have commented in detail on the
proposed garden store, other than the appellant’s suggestions that the Council
raised no objection to it.
Conclusion
14. For the reasons given above, the proposed development would conflict with the
development plan, when taken as a whole. It also conflicts with the Framework
and other material considerations do not indicate that I should make a decision
otherwise than in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly, I
conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
K Reeves
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.