Appeal 3271394

The appeal is dismissed.

The site visit was undertaken by an Appeal Planning Officer whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

On 20 July 2021 the Government published a revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework). [name] have had regard to the revised national policy as a material consideration in my decision-making, planning decisions must still be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the issues most relevant to the appeal remain unaffected by the revisions to the Framework. I am therefore satisfied that there is no requirement to seek further submissions on the revised Framework, and that no party would be disadvantaged by such a course of action.

The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host property and the wider area.

The appeal dwelling is of similar character and appearance to the adjacent two storey properties on either side. All feature dark hanging tiles and/or timber cladding to the first floor, which is a key characteristic feature to properties in this locality, and contributes to a consistent visual appearance in the immediate street scene.

The proposed development involves the loss of the hanging tiles and inclusion of render to the upper floor. It would therefore remove a key characteristic of the original design of the host property and those in the wider area. Furthermore, the proposed render to the upper floor would be highly prominent and would appear as a stark and incongruous alteration that fails to reflect the design of properties in this locality.

I observed that there were other properties along [address] with an element of render. Some are a considerable distance from the appeal site and are read in a different context to the appeal property. It is however acknowledged that the bungalows opposite the appeal site have a part render finish, although this tends to be below eaves level with the characteristic hanging tile/cladding feature present above. As such, the rendered sections in those examples represents a minor feature that is not highly prominent in the wider street scene.

The appellant suggests that the hanging tiles are in a diminishing condition and the property suffers from poor insulation. I did not observe any obvious external concerns with regard to their condition, however, be that as it may, there is no convincing evidence before me to indicate that the necessary improvements cannot be achieved with a more appropriate material.

Accordingly, the proposal would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the wider area. It would therefore conflict with Policy ENV6 of the [name] and Chester Local Plan (the ‘CWCLP’) ([name]) [name] and Policies DM3 and DM21 of the CWCLP ([name]) [name] and [name]. Collectively, these policies seek to ensure, amongst other things, that developments are in keeping with and respect the character and appearance of the original dwelling and surrounding properties.

There are no material considerations that indicate the decision should be made other than in accordance with the development plan. Therefore, for the reasons given above, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and the Appeal Planning Officer’s report and, on that basis, I agree that the appeal should be dismissed.