Appeal 3289538

The appeal is dismissed.

The Council altered the description of development, this is also the description used by the Appellant on the appeal form. I consider this to be a more accurate description of the appeal proposal and accordingly I have adopted an amended description in the heading above rather than the appellants description of development.

The main issues in this appeal are the effect of the proposed development on (i) the character and appearance of the area; and (ii) the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, 45 and [address].

The site is within a residential area characterised predominantly by detached and semi-detached properties. Whilst there are varying designs of properties in the immediate area there is a commonality of features such as hipped roofs and first floor windows directly beneath the eaves of the roof.

Raising the roof to form a gap between the top of the first floor windows and the eaves would disrupt the harmonious feature of the streetscene, this combined with the hip to gable change in roof design would result in an incongruous form of development.

The proposed development would be disproportionate to the host property and at would be out of keeping with the prevailing characteristics of the area.

I conclude that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area. There is conflict with Policy GD7 of the Fylde Local Plan to 2032 (incorporating [name]) (the Local Plan) and Policy DH1 of the [name] on the Sea, Neighbourhood Development Plan 2016-2031 which seeks amongst other things to ensure developments are of a high standards of design which positively contribute to local distinctiveness and character.

There is also conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) (the Framework) which seeks to ensure developments are of good design appropriate and sympathetic to their surroundings.

The proposed development includes a dormer window serving a staircase. There are existing windows at first floor facing the neighbouring properties to the rear, namely 45 and [address]. Whilst the proposed development would introduce a window at a higher level, mutual overlooking already exists. I note that the appellant proposes to provide obscure glazing to this window, this could be controlled by the imposition of a planning condition. The proposed development would not exacerbate the current arrangements in terms of overlooking.

I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties, 45 and [address]. There is no conflict with Policy GD7 of the Local Plan which seeks amongst other things to ensure development does not adversely affect neighbouring properties.

There is also no conflict with the Framework which seeks to ensure developments maintain a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.

[name] have concluded that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of neighbouring properties, this does not outweigh the harm I have identified in terms of the character and appearance of the area.

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