1 Melton Grove Lytham St Annes Lancashire FY8 5PN

Application Details

Applicant & Agent

Planning Application Dates

Planning Decision

Why it was refused

1. 1.Due to the overall scale and design resultant from the multiple extensions and alterations, the development would appear as an in-subservient and unsympathetic addition within the street scene of both within Melton Grove and along Church Road, which would be incongruous to the prevailing scale and character of surrounding properties. The flat roof to the single-storey extension would not reflect the character of the host, and would result in an awkward juxtaposition with the simple scale and dual pitch-roofed profile of the host dwelling. In addition, the raising of the eaves, ridge, and gable heights would introduce a visual dominance within the area, detracting from and harming the consistent scale and design of neighbouring properties on Melton Grove. The proposed extensions, by virtue of its excessive massing, height in relation to the neighbouring properties, and flat-roofed profile, would therefore introduce a dominant and unsympathetic addition which would be incompatible with and not subservient to the scale, character and roof form of the existing bungalow or those other properties to Melton Grove, whilst having a harmful impact on the character and appearance of the street scene due to prominence of the host within such views from Church Road and Eden Avenue positioned to the south. The proposed development is therefore of a poor design in conflict with the requirements of Design Notes 1, 2, and 6 of the Council’s ‘Extending Your Home’ Supplementary Planning Document, Fylde Local Plan to 2032 (incorporating Partial Review) policy GD7 d), f), h) and i), and paragraphs S4 and DP3 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. 2.The application relates to a simple-designed detached bungalow occupying a plot to the head of a cul-de-sac on Melton Grove. The application site lies adjacent to the Grade II listed Lytham Boundary Wall and adjacent to the boundary of the Lytham Avenues Conservation Area. The property is part of a group of 20 modestly scaled and designed post-war bungalows within a small development set behind the Lytham Boundary Wall and planted open spaces creating a particular character and form which has been preserved and merits material consideration due to the aesthetic value and historic significance. Views of the host property and proposed dormer extension are prominent in the context of the Grade II Listed Wall and from within the Conservation Area. The cumulative effect from the siting, scale, and design of the extensions and alterations, exacerbated by the position of the host property would result in a prominent, unsympathetic, and starkly contrasting feature in the background of the Grade II Listed Lytham Boundary Wall and from vantage points within the Lytham Avenues Conservation Area. The proposed development is therefore of a poor design which fails to preserve or enhance the setting of the Lytham Avenues Conservation Area and Grade II Listed Wall, and would result in harm to their significance as designated heritage assets. Whilst the level of harm arising to the designated heritage assets would be low, the applicant has failed to provide clear and convincing justification for this harm or to demonstrate that any public benefits exist which would outweigh it. Accordingly, the proposal would fail to improve the character and quality of the area and would have a harmful and erosive impact on the significance of surrounding designated heritage assets. No public benefits sufficient to outweigh this harm would arise as a result of the scheme. The proposed development is therefore in conflict with the requirements of Policies GD7 and ENV5 of the Fylde Local Plan to 2032 (incorporating Partial Review), and paragraphs HE4, HE5, HE6, HE7, and HE9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and sections 66 and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
3. 3.The proposed development would involve the removal of two trees (referenced G1 by the Arboricultural Implications Assessment (Mulberry, TRE/1MGLSA/Rev A, 8 September 2026) and would be constructed in close proximity of 2 no. groups of mature trees (referenced as G2 and G3 by the Arboricultural Implications Assessment (Mulberry, TRE/1MGLSA/Rev A, 8 September 2026) that are protected by a Tree Preservation Order. These trees occupy a prominent, roadside location within the front and southern side garden of the application property and make a substantial contribution to the sylvan character and 'green corridor' setting of the street scene, setting of the Lytham Avenues Conservation Area and setting of the Grade II Listed Lytham Boundary Wall. Notwithstanding the recommendations of the submitted Arboricultural Method Statement (Mulberry, TRE/1MGLSA, 01 April 2026), it is considered that the excavation works associated with the construction of the proposed side extension and car parking area encroach upon the Root Protection Area (RPA) of protected trees within groups G2 and G3. Given the mature trees are showing varying degrees of decline and with likely constraints on rooting, even limited root loss resultant from the development could have disproportionate long-term consequences for tree health and vitality. Moreover, the scheme relies on mitigation rather than avoidance, proposes root severance for the single-storey extension, impacting on the continued health and vitality of protected trees, and fails to justify the need for development, the loss of two trees and risk to other landscaping, beyond private benefits, nor demonstrate a tree-led design approach that considers site specific conditions. Accordingly, the proposed development would fail to protect existing natural features which contribute positively to the open and landscaped character and appearance of the street scene within Melton Grove and Church Road, as well as the setting of the Lytham Avenues Conservation Area and Grade II Listed Wall. It is also likely to cause significant harm to these specimens which would prejudice their future retention, thereby accentuating the development’s harmful effects. Whilst the level of harm arising to the conservation area and Grade II Listed Wall would be low, the applicant has failed to provide clear and convincing justification for this harm, adequate mitigation or compensation, or to demonstrate that any public benefits exist which would outweigh the harm caused. The proposal is therefore in conflict with the requirements of Policies GD7, ENV1 and ENV5 of the Fylde Local Plan to 2032 (incorporating Partial Review) and Policies DP3, N2, and HE4, HE6, and HE9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and sections 66 and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

From the council's decision notice.

Publicity

Appeal

Additional Information