Redesigned roof and dormer at 22 Marlborough Road, Castle Bromwich, Solihull

What was proposed

The application proposed removing and redesigning the roof over the dwelling, including extending the existing rear dormer window.

“Proposal: Roof over existing dwelling removed & redesigned including extension to existing dormer window to rear. (Resubmission of approved application PL/2020/00182/MINFHO)”

“This application seeks permission for: Roof over existing dwelling removed & redesigned including extension to existing dormer window to rear (Resubmission of approved application PL/2020/00182/MINFHO).”

Officer report

Earlier planning decisions

Earlier permissions covered extensions and a similar roof and dormer scheme that was approved but later lapsed.

“PL/2012/00592/FULL- Approved- 09.03.2012 Two storey side and rear extension, and ground floor rear extensions.”

“PL/2020/00182/MINFHO- Approved- 17.03.2020 Roof over existing dwelling removed & redesigned including extension to existing dormer window to rear.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal was considered visually acceptable, policy compliant and respectful of neighbouring amenities.

“This report will demonstrate that the proposal is visually acceptable and also respects the amenities enjoyed by neighbouring properties. It is identical to PL/2020/00182/MINFHO, that was approved but has now lapsed. Given that that proposal was deemed acceptable and policy compliant, and that relevant policies, guidance and material considerations have not materially since changed, it would now be unreasonable to reach a different conclusion.”

“Accordingly, the proposal is compliant with policy P14 and P15 of the Local Plan and the SPD House Extension.”

Officer report

Design and neighbour impact

The redesigned roof would not increase the overall ridge height, would contain the dormer visually and would not cause unacceptable overlooking, loss of light or overbearing effects.

“The alterations to the roof do not increase the overall ridge height of the dwelling. The intention is to better integrate and visually contain the rear box dormer so that it is not visible from street level, resulting in a simplified and cohesive roof form. The dormer itself is of an appropriate scale and proportion, sitting comfortably within the roof plane.”

“The rear box dormer is not considered to result in any greater level of overlooking than the existing windows located in the rear elevation of the dwelling. The overall size, scale, and position of the dormer within the roof plane are acceptable. The minor raising of the roof ridge required to accommodate the dormer would not result in any loss of light to the neighbouring property at No. 24, nor would it appear overbearing.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The parish council and drainage consultee raised no objection, while one objection said the proposal conflicted with policy and harmed the street scene and neighbours.

“No objection was received from Cllr. Feeney. All correspondence has been reviewed and the main issues raised are summarised below (Planning Committee Members have access to all third party correspondence received):”

“Contrary to P15 as it does not respect the street scene nor neighbouring properties.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Councillor Alan Feeney spoke against the application.

The committee decision

The committee granted conditional approval in accordance with the officer recommendation.

“PL/2026/00452/MINFHO - 22 MARLBOROUGH ROAD Conditional approval as per the officer recommendation.”

Minutes