Resubmission of a householder planning application with a lower roofline for the alteration from a mono pitched to a dual pitched roof on the existing outbuilding
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Character & Appearance
Residential Amenity
Conversion/Use
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 24 June 2026
By Michael Evans BA MA MPhil DipTP MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 26 June 2026
Appeal Ref: 6008280
2 Burnt Oak Terrace, Gillingham ME7 1DP
• 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 Pawel Mackow, M House Group against the decision of Medway Council.
• The application Ref is MC/26/0060.
• The development proposed is described on the application form as “Resubmission of a householder
planning application with a lower roofline for the alteration from a mono pitched to a dual pitched roof
on the existing outbuilding”.
Preliminary matter
1. The description given on the application form includes matters that do not comprise
an act of development. In the decision below I have therefore used that given on
the Council’s decision notice, which more accurately reflects the proposed
development.
Decision
2. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the conversion of an
existing single storey garage/outbuilding roof from a mono pitched to a dual pitched
roof with a rooflight and front window replacement with a casement window, at 2
Burnt Oak Terrace, Gillingham ME7 1DP, in accordance with the terms of the
application, Ref MC/26/0060 and the plans submitted with it, 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: 202 rev D.
3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the
development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling.
Main Issues
3. The main issues in this appeal are:
- Whether the proposal would result in the creation of an independent dwelling.
- The effect on the character and appearance of the locality.
Appeal Decision 6008280
2
- The effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of the adjacent dwelling at 4
Burnt Oak Terrace, with regard to whether the development would appear
overbearing and overshadowing.
Reasons
Independent dwelling
4. The proposal concerns an outbuilding that would be used as an annexe. The
building would contain a bedroom and a shower room with a fairly modest floor
area of only about 21 sq m. It would have a significantly smaller footprint and floor
area than the associated house. There is no proposal to subdivide the garden so
that this would clearly be shared. In these circumstances, there would be likely to
be an appreciable degree of interaction between occupiers of the annexe and host
dwelling, indicating a significant functional relationship.
5. Due to the above factors, the proposed development would not result in the
creation of an independent dwelling. Moreover, it would constitute ordinary living
accommodation that is normally to be expected as part and parcel of a dwelling. In
any event, there is no separate dwelling before me. If the structure is not used as
proposed, the plot is subdivided, or if there is a material change of use in the future
to create an independent dwelling, then a separate grant of planning permission
would be required. In these circumstances the building would be at risk of
enforcement action if such permission is not granted.
Character and appearance
6. The existing structure is sited adjacent to the footway in Saunders Street at the end
of the fairly modestly sized rear garden of the host dwelling. The height of the
structure would be raised by the construction of a pitched roof with gable ends
above the existing mono-pitched feature. There would also be rooflights in the
development and ground levels rise towards the end of the rear garden at the
appeal site.
7. However, despite matters such as these the ridge of the new roof to the single
storey building would be at a significantly lower level than those of the two storey
host dwelling and immediately adjacent property in Saunders Street. The footprint
of the outbuilding would not change and remain appreciably less than that of the
host dwelling. In consequence, the bulk, mass and size would not be excessive
and together with the appearance reflect its function as a domestic outbuilding.
Rather than appearing overly dominant the outbuilding would be subservient to the
associated dwelling. Moreover, the roof form of the altered building would better
reflect the pitched roof character of nearby dwellings than the existing somewhat
utilitarian appearance.
8. For the above reasons, it is concluded that the character and appearance of the
locality would not be harmed. The proposal would comply with Medway Local Plan
Policy BNE1, the aims of which include that the design of development should
respect the scale and appearance of buildings and the visual amenity of the
surrounding area.
Appeal Decision 6008280
3
Living conditions
9. During my site visit I was able to consider the effect of the proposal from the
neighbouring dwelling at no 4 Burnt Oak Terrace. The back garden of this property
is of a relatively modest size and there is a two storey gable end that abuts the rear
boundary. The altered outbuilding would adjoin the side boundary and rise to a
total height of about 4.5m, which would be approximately 2m higher than at
present.
10. However, despite the above considerations the roof would slope down towards the
boundary with the outbuilding also being set back from the rear of the neighbouring
dwelling. These matters would significantly limit the perceived bulk. Bearing in
mind these factors, the size and height of the resultant structure would be
insufficient to give rise to an oppressive degree of enclosure that might reasonably
be considered overbearing. For similar reasons there would be no unacceptable
degree of overshadowing.
11. For the above reasons, it is concluded that the living conditions of the adjacent
occupiers would not be harmed. The proposal would comply with Medway Local
Plan Policy BNE2, which seeks to prevent such adverse effects.
Conclusion
12. The National Planning Policy Framework indicates that decisions should ensure
that developments satisfy a number of considerations. These include adding to the
overall quality of the area, being visually attractive and creating a high standard of
amenity for existing users, which would all be achieved in this case.
13. Because of the absence of harm and compliance with the development plan, the
appeal is allowed. In the interest of certainty, a condition specifying the approved
plans should be imposed. The materials used should match those of the host
dwelling to protect the appearance of the locality.
M Evans
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.