Agenda item

Single storey side extension, extend existing room in roof space, alter existing dormers (with variation of condition 1 of planning permission P/HOU/2023/02368 to agree revised fenestration, an increase in height of the parapet to the larger flat roof dormer and alterations to internal layout. There is no increase in the size of first floor windows, or footprint of the proposed work).

The committee agreed to extend the meeting beyond three hours.

The Development Management Team Leader presented the application for retrospective permission, as the development had not been carried out in accordance with previously approved plans. The site location plan was displayed, and it was noted that the site lay within the Dorset National Landscape. It was explained that only the effects of the changes were being considered, with the main concern being whether the amendments were acceptable in terms of the character and appearance of the area.

The proposed alterations and elevations were shown, along with photographs comparing the extensions to the approved plans. The changes included a dormers that were higher than previously approved, exceeding the ridge height of the dwelling.

It was reported that objections had been received from the Ward Member, the Parish Council, and a neighbouring resident. Officers considered that the harm to the visual appearance of the area was very localised and limited by mature protected trees. Consultation responses had raised concerns about the impact on appearance; however, the issue was considered to be confined to the immediate locality.

It was explained that Harmans Cross contained a mixture of dwelling types and that, while the proposal did not enhance the surroundings, its dark colour was recessive against the backdrop of trees. Officers considered that the level of harm to the area was limited and did not warrant refusal. Photographs of the wider landscape were shown, illustrating the housing against the countryside backdrop, and the Development Management Team Leader confirmed dwelling was not visible from these views.

Mr Hicks spoke in opposition to the application as a neighbouring resident. He explained that the extension had been built over the ridge height of the property which considerably increased the bulk and scale of the dwelling compared to the approved plans and impacted on the outlook from his property.

Mr Cooper spoke as the applicant for the application. He explained that the change in design had occurred due to structural reasons that required the height of the extension to be higher than planned.

A statement from the Ward Member Cllr Ben Wilson was read out on his behalf by the Vice-Chair. He stated that he did not agree that with assertion that the harm was localised and believed that a site visit was necessary so that members could see the impact of the works in person.

It was proposed by Cllr Brenton to defer the application to allow the committee to conduct a site visit, the proposal failed to be seconded and so the motion fell.

Members had the opportunity to debate the merits of the application, during which several members stated that they disagreed with the officer’s conclusion regarding the harm to the character of the area and that on balance, due to the scale of the carried out works and the fact that it was not subservient to the ridge height of the dwelling it was unacceptable.

Other members expressed their view that the changes from the original approved plans were fairly minimal and they did not believe that the works as carried out caused more harm to the area, supported by the limited visual impact of the property from the wider area.

It was proposed by Cllr Sowry-House and seconded by Cllr Flower, that the application be granted as per the officer’s recommendation.

Decision: That the application be granted subject to the conditions set out in the appendix to these minutes.