Appeal 3288760

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

An application for costs was made by [name] against Manchester City Council. This application is the subject of a separate decision.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area.

The host dwelling is a previously extended detached dwelling in a residential area characterised by detached dwellings. Properties are generally set back from the main road which gives a spacious and open character to the area with a regular rhythm of dwellings. Although several of the properties have been previously extended, they predominantly retain a hipped roof pattern and are of a similar height. [site address] is located almost opposite the junction with [address] which allows longer range views of the property.

The appeal proposal would increase the bulk and massing of the roof, including increasing the steepness of the pitches roof to all elevations. The resultant roof, including the crown element would be a bulky and dominant feature which would not reflect the design of the host property. It would be a prominent feature in the streetscene and would harmfully erode the spaciousness of the locality.

The raising of the roof height and change to the roof pitch would unbalance the property with the roof becoming a dominant, bulky feature which would not reflect the character or appearance of the host property. As a consequence, the contribution that the extended dwelling would make to the character and appearance of the area would be eroded.

My attention has been drawn to examples of dwellings in the local area with a crown roof. I am unconvinced that these developments are directly comparable to the proposal before me, given that from my observations, they did not appear to have altered the roof pitch or height. In addition, I am not aware of the circumstances that led to their approval including the relevant development plan policies in place at the time. In any event, I have determined this appeal on its own merits based on the site-specific circumstances of the case.

I conclude that the proposal would harm the character and appearance of the host property and surrounding area and would conflict with policies SP1 and DM1 of the [name] and policies DC1.1 and DC1.2 of the Unitary Development Plan for the City of Manchester which together, amongst other things seeks to ensure that development has regard to the appearance in the street scene and is not excessively bulky and out of character with development in the area

I note the appellant’s concerns regarding the Council’s handling of the planning application. However, this is a matter that would need to be taken up with the Council in the first instance. In determining this appeal, I am only able to have regard to the planning merits of the case.

The proposed development conflicts with the development plan as a whole and there are no other considerations, that outweigh this conflict. I therefore recommend that the appeal is dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed.