Retrospective permission for dormer loft conversion

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 7 October 2025 by N McGurk BSc (Hons) MCD MBA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 21 October 2025 Appeal Ref: APP/M0655/D/25/3371321 38 St Bridgets Close, Poulton-with-Fearnhead, Warrington, WA2 0EW • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Dave Millin against the decision of Warrington Borough Council. • The application Ref is 2025/00639/FULH. • The development proposed is a retrospective permission for dormer loft conversion. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a retrospective permission for dormer loft conversion at 38 St Bridgets Close, Poulton-with- Fearnhead, Warrington, WA2 0EW in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 2025/00639/FULH and subject to the following condition: 1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: PCE-Millin-July-22-Planning. Procedural Matter 2. The development the subject of this appeal has already taken place. Main Issues 3. The main issues in this case are the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area; and its effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Number 44 St Bridgets Close, with regards to privacy. Reasons Character and appearance 4. The appeal property is a semi-detached bungalow. The appeal dwelling is set back from the road behind a paved parking area and has a garden to the rear. 5. The appeal property is located in a residential area characterised by the presence of a small number of semi-detached bungalows and, more commonly, two storey detached and semi-detached dwellings, set back from the road behind small front gardens and/or parking areas, and with longer gardens to the rear. 6. The presence of gardens and spaces between dwellings provides for a sense of spaciousness and greenery. 7. The appeal dwelling is situated close to a bend along St Bridgets Close. Its rear garden backs on to the rear gardens of semi-detached bungalows located to the Appeal Decision APP/M0655/D/25/3371321 2 rear, whilst the northern side of the appeal property’s rear garden shares boundaries with the rear gardens of two storey dwellings located to the north. 8. This arrangement results in the rear elevation of the appeal dwelling being largely hidden from public view. Further, during my site visit, I observed that the presence of trees and planting provides considerable screening between dwellings in the area. Consequently, only glimpses of the side of the dormer can be observed from the public domain, and it does not appear prominently in its surroundings. 9. Further to the above, the dormer the subject of this appeal is no higher than, and is set in from, the sides of the host dwelling’s roof. As such, it appears subservient to the host dwelling, and it does not appear unduly dominant. 10. Taking all of the above into account, the development does not harm the character and appearance of the area, and is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework, to Policy DC6 of the Warrington Local Plan (2023) (Local Plan), or to the Council’s House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document (2021) (SPD), which, together amongst other things, seek to protect local character. Living conditions 11. During my site visit, I observed that the predominant presence of two storey dwellings combines with the juxtaposition of dwellings in the area to provide for a degree of overlooking. As noted above, the presence of trees and planting in the area provides screening between dwellings. This is particularly noticeable where gardens back on to one another, as is the case in respect of the appeal property and its neighbours. 12. Number 44 St Bridgets Close is located to the rear of, and offset to the side of, the appeal dwelling. During my site visit, I observed there to be a considerable distance between No 44’s closest rear-facing windows and the window of the dormer the subject of this appeal. 13. I find that the presence of gardens, boundary features and significant planting combines with the distance between the two dwellings, and their being off set to one another, to prevent harmful overlooking from arising between the development and No 44. Any overlooking that does occur is little different to the general overlooking that exists throughout the surrounding area to a non-harmful degree. 14. Taking all of the above into account, I find that the development does not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of Number 44 St Bridgets Close with regards to privacy, and is not contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework; to Policy ENV8 of the Local Plan, or to the Council’s SPD which, together amongst other things, seek to protect residential amenity. Conclusion 15. For the reasons given above, the appeal is successful. N McGurk INSPECTOR