Appeal 3287702

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of a garden shed in the front garden at [site address] , Fulbourn [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/03984/HFUL, dated 2 September 2021, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: unnumbered location plan, drawing numbered MW-P30.

The main issues are the proposal’s effect on the street scene and whether it would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Fulbourn Conservation Area (the CA).

The appeal property is a bungalow of a typical mid-twentieth century design and at the end of a line of similar residences. There is an area of hardstanding to the front of the site and a holly tree and low wall on the roadside boundary.

The CA includes the village core and some of the roads leading to it. The CA gains its significance from the historic buildings, open spaces and curving streets, which all help create an attractive rural village environment.

The Fulbourn Village Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2020 (SPD) and the Fulbourn and Fulbourn Hospital Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan 2021 (CAA) identify the appeal property as falling within the [name] character area of the CA. The SPD and the CAA state that this part of the village has the strongest rural character with most buildings in spacious plots and set away from roads. However, the appeal property forms part of a tight-knit enclave of bungalows with a strong residential appearance and nature. As such, they make no positive contribution to the CA’s rural qualities. It is noteworthy that the CAA fails to identify the appeal property as being an important building or its front garden as an important open space.

The shed would be near to the road. However, a tall boundary wall adjacent to the site would screen the proposal so it would not be seen from the direction of [address]. From directly in front, only the upper part of the shed would be seen over a length of roadside wall. When travelling from [address], the holly tree would conceal the shed until nearby. Even if the tree was removed, the proposal would be seen against the wall on the site’s side boundary. As such, the proposal would not be visually prominent even though it would be in front of the dwelling.

Also, the shed would be low compared to the bungalow and would have a small footprint. Given its modest size and discreet position next to boundary walls, the proposal would not erode open space that makes any specific contribution to the attractiveness of [address] or the CA as a whole.

For the above reasons, I conclude the development would not harm the street scene and that it would have a neutral effect on the qualities of the CA which help create its significance. As such, it would preserve the character and appearance of the CA as a whole. In these regards, it would accord with policies HQ/1 and NH/14 of the South Cambridgeshire Local Plan 2018. Amongst other things, these seek to ensure development is compatible with its context and the historic environment.

[address] is a historic grade II listed building on the opposite side of the road to the appeal property. It is set back from [address] behind a tall brick wall and so there is limited intervisibility between it and the appeal site. To a limited degree, the shed would be visible in the same street scene as the listed building’s boundary wall. Nonetheless, it would have no effect on views of [address], its setting or its significance.

The site also adjoins the garden of [address], another grade II listed building. However, the shed would be fully screened from this property by the boundary wall and there would be no intervisibility. As such, the proposal would have no effect on the setting or significance of this listed building.

I have considered the planning conditions suggested by the Council having regard to the tests set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the submissions, I impose a condition that refers to the appeal drawings. These include sufficient detail on the external materials to be used in the construction of the shed so there is no need for a separate condition on this matter.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.