Appeal 3273611

The appeal is dismissed.

The Council altered the description of development, this is also the description used by the Appellant on the appeal form. In light of amended plans which were considered by the Council prior to the determination of the application I consider this to be a more accurate description of the appeal proposal and accordingly I have adopted the amended description in the heading above rather than the Appellants application form description of development.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site is a semi-detached property which lies within a predominantly residential area, characterised by varying designs of properties. The appeal site is symmetrical in design to that of the adjoining property No. 168. However, I observed during my site visit that window detailing and external materials differ between the pair.

I understand that a two storey side extension has been approved to No. 168, this was not built at the time of my site visit. Substantive details have not been provided relating to the approved scheme to allow me to assess that scheme against the development before me. Notwithstanding this the proposed development is for a front dormer addition which I understand differs from the approved two storey development at the adjacent property.

The Appellant has drawn my attention to a number of dormer additions within the area, during my site visit I also noted that there are varying forms of dormers present. Nonetheless the bulky front dormer proposed would be a prominent addition to the property which would unbalance the symmetrical design of the semi-detached pair.

I find that the proposed development would be incongruous and unsympathetic to the appeal property, the adjoining property and in turn to the streetscene in general.

I conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area. There is conflict with Policy HS5 of the Chorley Local Plan 2012-2026, Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Development Plan Document (2015) which seeks amongst other things that developments respect the existing property and surrounding area. There is also conflict with the Chorley Council Householder Design Guidance Supplementary Planning Document (2017) which seeks to ensure dormers are sympathetic in design.

The Appellant has highlighted that the proposed development is required due to the personal circumstances of the occupants of the property. However, limited information has been provided to confirm that an alternative development could not be provided to meet the needs of the occupants. For instance, the Council has confirmed that a dormer to the rear could be installed utilising permitted development rights. I therefore give the personal circumstances of the occupants limited weight.

The site lies within the Green Belt, the Council in the Application Report considered that the proposed development would not be a disproportionate addition over and above the original building. I do not disagree.

For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.