A ROMSEY resident said she is disappointed with a successful appeal to keep two extensions, overlooking her back garden.

Patricia Nightingale, of Treviglio Close, previously spoke out about the work on two houses in Cupernham Lane.

Test Valley Borough Council refused planning permission for dormer windows and a room in the roof, but work continued. 

Developer Stratland Estates launched an appeal, which the Planning Inspectorate accepted on Monday, November 13.

Planning inspector Jonathan Manning said: “The appellant has set out that as a fall-back position the dormer windows could be constructed under permitted development rights in any event. The council is of the view that permitted development rights can only be exercised once the development has been completed in accordance with the approved plans, which is not the case here.

READ MORE: Work finishes on controversial house extensions with appeal not yet decided

“I appreciate the concerns of local residents in terms of the importance of following correct planning procedures. 

“I acknowledge the frustrations expressed by local residents that permitted development rights were not removed when the council allowed the original application. However, were the appeal to be dismissed there is no mechanism for retrospectively removing such rights.

“The occupants of a neighbouring property have also raised concerns about overlooking and a loss of privacy. Whilst some views would be possible from the dwelling located on plot 5 these would be oblique and not in my view unacceptable. 

“I have found that the proposal would not result in unacceptable overlooking. However, I have found conflict with the development plan due to the harm caused to the character and appearance of the host dwellings and the area. 

“However, the fall-back position is a material consideration that outweighs this conflict. On this basis, the appeal succeeds.”

SEE ALSO: Romsey planning: residents angry over controversial house extensions

The inspector added that a further condition would be needed to have obscure glazing on the bathroom windows in the dormers.

Hampshire Chronicle:

Mrs Nightingale said: “I was disappointed but not surprised to hear that Stratland's appeal had been successful and that they can leave the dormer windows in place that they built without planning consent. 

“There were two main reasons for the appeal being allowed despite the inspector agreeing that there was mutual overlooking. One was that the distance of 29 metres between the houses was greater than the 20 metres that is usually considered acceptable. The other was that even if the appeal was refused and the developers removed the dormer windows, once they had complied with the original plans they could have rebuilt the dormers under permitted development rights and maybe even built them larger.

“This shows a ridiculous anomaly in our planning laws which gives developers a green light to flout them.”

Hampshire Chronicle: Poplar branches in Mrs Nightingale's garden

Mrs Nightingale added that she was concerned for the safety of three poplar trees between her property and the development. 

She said: “They should be pollarded, or at least trimmed back, which will encourage them to produce new shoots and improve screening. In addition, the gaps between them should be filled by planting new young native trees, which will also improve screening and be good for wildlife. I have written to the developer to this effect, but have received no reply.”

Stratland Estates has been contacted for a comment.