Appeal 3277612

The appeal is dismissed.

Since the Council made its decision, a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) has been issued. I am satisfied that the changes to national policy do not prejudice the cases made by either party and have determined this appeal on the basis of the 2021 version of the Framework.

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

The appeal concerns a modern semi-detached dwelling located in a suburban residential estate, which is characterised by houses of a similar age and style. The houses are generally set back behind open front gardens, and this, combined with the ample amenity space and grassed service strips contribute to the estate having an attractive, green and spacious character.

Number [site address] (No. 1) occupies a corner position at the end of the street, with its front elevation facing onto the turning area. Due to its siting, the existing side and rear elevations of the appeal property are prominent features when viewed from [address].

The existing side elevation of No. 1 is set back from the road, behind a garden fence at the rear of the grassed service strip. The proposal would not interrupt the front building line but would protrude further forward than the existing built form along the main part of [address]. The building line on this side of the street is less clearly defined than that of the other side of the road, but nonetheless the existing set back, which reflects that at the side of [address], contributes to the spacious character of the area, which would be eroded by the proposed extension. Furthermore, even though the grass service strip would be retained, the proposed stepped side elevation would result in a large expanse of blank brickwork, which would appear as an unattractive and overly prominent feature within the streetscene, causing harm to the character of the area.

An existing two storey side addition at [address] extends to the back of the rear of the grass service strip, but the side of that property faces onto a wide pedestrian accessway, rather than onto a road, so the context is somewhat different from the appeal now before me. In any event, I have considered the appeal proposal on its own merits and am not bound by previous decisions made by the Council.

The proposal would appear subservient to the host dwelling and sufficient space would be retained to avoid any harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers of 12 and [address]. However, these matters would not outweigh the harm which I have identified.

I conclude that the proposed extension would cause harm to the character and appearance of the area. It would conflict with Policy CP10 of the Wigan Local Plan 2013, which requires new development to be integrated effectively within its surroundings to create attractive places. There is further conflict with the detailed guidance in paragraph 3.30 of the House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document 2019, and with paragraph 130c) of the Framework, regarding the need for development to be sympathetic to local character.

The Council has also referred to Policy CP17 of the Local Plan, but that is concerned with environmental protection, rather than matters of character and appearance, so is not directly applicable to this appeal.

The proposal would conflict with the development plan and there are no material considerations which would outweigh this finding. For the reasons given, the appeal is therefore dismissed.