Loft conversion at 72 High Street, Blunsdon, Swindon

What was proposed

The application sought a loft conversion with a raised rear roof, eight rooflights and a large triangular rear window.

“Proposal: Conversion of loft to include increased roof pitch to rear section of existing roof, insertion of roof lights into side roof slope, associated works.”

“This application seeks full planning permission for the conversion of the loft at 72 High Street involving the increased roof height of part of the existing roof alongside the insertion of eight rooflights (four to either side) and a large triangular window within the rear elevation. The dwelling is approximately 16 metres in length, and the rear 10.7 metres of the roof will be increased in height by 0.91 metres (91cm). The eaves of the roof will remain…”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a detached bungalow in a row of similar properties, about 20 metres from the Broad Blunsdon Conservation Area.

“The application site consists of a detached bungalow located in the village of Blunsdon. The dwelling sits within a row of similarly sized bungalows set well-back form the road with large driveways. The dwelling is approximately 20 metres from the boundary of the Broad Blunsdon Conservation Area, which is located to the east.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

Earlier permissions covered side and rear extensions, while a previous loft conversion application with a car port was withdrawn.

“Planning Permission S/HOU/19/0108 granted April 2019. - Erection of single storey side and rear extensions.”

“Planning Permission S/HOU/25/0920 withdrawn September 2025. - Conversion of loft to include increased roof pitch to rear section of existing roof, insertion of roof lights into side roof slope, associated works and erection of 4-bay wooden car port to driveway.”

Officer report

Why officers recommended approval

Officers considered the design proportionate and compatible with the area, with no harm to heritage assets, neighbours, parking or highway safety.

“It is considered that the proposed loft conversion and associated works would integrate well with both the host property and surrounding area. The scale, siting and design of the proposed alterations would not harm the character or appearance of the dwelling or surrounding street scene. The proposed roof-height increase remains proportionate, and the additional fenestration is appropriate in style and size.”

“Policy TR2 of the Swindon Borough Local Plan states that development shall be permitted where proposals provide access that is appropriate to the scale, type and location without detriment to highway safety and local amenity. Policy TR2 also requires parking provision, including secure cycle parking provided in accordance with the Council’s adopted Parking Standards.”

Officer report

Consultation and objections

The parish council objected that the raised roof and rooflights would conflict with the street’s character, while no other representations were received.

“Blunsdon Parish Council object to the proposal on the following grounds:”

“Object to the proposed raising of the roof and installation of dormer lights on the grounds that the development does not align with the established character and aesthetic of the surrounding street.’ • ‘The proposed alterations are inconsistent with the architectural style of neighbouring properties.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A supporter and a parish councillor made supporting submissions at the meeting.

What members considered

Supporters said the property’s orientation, setback and modest roof increase would reduce visual impact, while objections cited local character and precedent.

“The rise in the height of the roof will be less than 1m, meaning that the visual impact will be negligible. • The development property is set back from the road significantly, lessening the impact on the street scene. • Adjacent properties have dormer windows, outbuildings and solar panels on them, amongst other developments. The proposals for No. 72 are modest by comparison.”

“The proposals would see the building no longer align with the character of the setting; the proposed alterations are inconsistent with the local vernacular. • The precedent within the local area is that altering the roofline of a property is not in- keeping with the character of the area. • The proposed changes conflict with the aims of the neighbourhood plan.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted planning permission subject to the conditions set out in the case officer’s report.

“Councillor Matthew Courtliff proposed that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the Case Officer’s report. Councillor Gary Sumner seconded the proposal.”

“Resolved – That planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the Case Officer’s report.”

Minutes