Erection of a conservatory to side elevation Decision

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 2 January 2019 by K Winnard LL.B (Hons) Solicitor an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 12th March 2019 Appeal Ref: APP/P4225/D/18/3216089 34 Avon Road Heywood OL10 4RW • 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 Whitehead against the decision of Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council. • The application Ref. 18/00661/HOUS, dated 10 June 2018, was refused by notice dated 24 August 2018. • The development proposed is the erection of a conservatory to side elevation Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Procedural Matter 2. The conservatory has already been built. Accordingly, the application is retrospective and I have determined the appeal on this basis. Main Issue 3. The effect of the development on the character and appearance of the existing building and the surrounding area. Reasons 4. The appeal property is a semi-detached two storey dwelling, set within a modern residential estate with a variety of house types and designs. It is situated on an incline within a prominent corner plot at the junction of Avon Road and Norfolk Avenue such that the front, rear and side elevations of the conservatory are visible on each approach to the appeal site. 5. The size and scale of the conservatory, which is almost as wide as the existing dwelling and is of an irregular shape, make it appear disproportionate to the host dwelling and its bulk is out of keeping with the straightforward design of the house. Set back from the road and with low boundary hedging, both 34 and 32 Avon Road have an appearance of balance and symmetry when viewed from the front. The erection of the large conservatory has created an imbalance between the two properties and their modest style and design is now dominated by the bulk of the conservatory. Consequently, the conservatory draws the eye and is prominent and incongruous in the street scene. APP/P4225/D/18/3216089 2 6. Notwithstanding the erection of a boarded fence along the side and rear boundary, which provides an element of screening to the development, the upper parts of the conservatory are still prominent, with large panels of UPVC glazing on the different roof slopes adding to the incongruity of the conservatory within the street scene. 7. Accordingly, the development is contrary to policies P3 and DM1 of the Rochdale Adopted Core Strategy which require, amongst other things, development proposals to be of high quality design. well-proportioned and contribute positively to the townscape. The development is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework which encourages good design and seeks to promote development sympathetic to local character. 8. The appellant refers to the lack of local objections and to his wish to provide additional ground floor living space for his family and any future occupiers of the property, and that sufficient garden space remains for the use of the occupiers of the dwelling. However, these are not matters which outweigh the harm to the character and appearance of the existing building and the area. Whilst the appellant refers to the development as being sustainable, the National Planning Policy Framework also requires development to add to the overall quality of the area and to be sympathetic to the surrounding built environment. 9. My attention has also been drawn to the erection of a large conservatory at a property along Avon Road which also occupies a prominent position within the street scene. However, the Council advises that this conservatory does not have the benefit of planning permission. In any event, the existence of similar developments does not justify development which would otherwise be unacceptable. I have determined this appeal on its own particular merits and have concluded that it causes significant harm for the reasons stated. 10. Accordingly, I dismiss the appeal. K Winnard INSPECTOR