Remove old front dormer, fit new dormer extended to front elevation and fit two velux to rear elevation

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 22 September 2020 by D Hartley BA (Hons) MTP MBA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 24th September 2020 Appeal Ref: APP/R0660/D/20/3253054 13 Lime Close, Sandbach, Cheshire CW11 1BZ • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Mark Wareham against the decision of Cheshire East Council. • The application Ref 19/5751C, dated 18 January 2020, was refused by notice dated 13 March 2020. • The development proposed is described as remove old front dormer, fit new dormer extended to front elevation and fit two velux to rear elevation. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed front dormer on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 3. The appeal property is semi-detached and includes an existing dormer which occupies a small proportion of the tiled roof being positioned just below the ridge and set back significantly from the front eaves of the property. Consequently, a large part of the roof is unbroken and this is typical of this cul- de-sac where the roofs are either fully unbroken or where there are proportionate and subordinate roof dormers. 4. One of the exceptions to the aforementioned distinctive characteristic of the area is No 30 Lime Close which includes a very large box-like dormer which occupies most of the roofslope of the dwelling and hence appears top heavy and dominant when viewed in the wider street-scene. The Council has indicated that planning permission was refused on appeal1 for this development and that it is the subject of an enforcement notice. 5. The proposed roof dormer would have a very similar appearance to the unauthorised roof dormer at No 30 Lime Close. It would occupy a significant proportion of the front roofslope of the dwelling and would appear dominant and intrusive when viewed in the street-scene. It would appear incongruous when viewed alongside the neighbouring semi-detached dwellinghouse which has an unbroken tiled roofslope. In this context, the front dormer would 1 APP/B0610/C/07/2034799 Appeal Decision APP/R0660/D/20/3253054 2 unacceptably harm the general design balance and symmetry that exists to the pair of semi-detached dwellings. 6. I therefore conclude that whilst the rear velux windows would be acceptable in design terms, the proposed front dormer would have a significantly adverse effect on the character and appearance of the area. Therefore, when the appeal development is considered as a whole it would not accord with the design requirements of policies SE1, SD1, SD2 of the Cheshire East Local Plan Strategy 2017; policy H2 of the Sandbach Neighbourhood Development Plan 2010-2030 and paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework which states that decisions should ensure that developments “function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development“. 7. In reaching the above conclusion, I acknowledge the reasons why the appellant wants additional floorspace, but in this case a refusal of planning permission is a necessary and proportionate approach to the legitimate aim of protecting the character and appearance of the area. Conclusion 8. I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed. D Hartley INSPECTOR