Appeal 3292727

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for two storey side extension, single storey front and rear extensions at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 21/02022/FUL, dated 18 November 2021, subject to the following conditions: (1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing nos. 003 SJ [name] ([name]) and 004 SJ [name] ([name]). (2) Before the feature timber shown on the approved drawings is applied to the front and rear gables, precise details of the finish shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. One approved in writing the feature timber shall be completed in accordance with the approved details and shall be maintained as such thereafter. (3) Before the development hereby approved is first occupied, precise details of one bat box and one group of three swift nest boxes/bricks including details of their specification and their proposed location on the dwelling, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Once approved the bat and swift nest boxes/bricks shall be installed in full accordance with the approved details and shall be retained thereafter.

During my site visit, I noted that development had already commenced but had not yet been completed. I have therefore considered the application on the basis that planning permission is sought retrospectively.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area.

No [site address] sits at the head of a cul-de-sac characterised by a mix of single storey and two-storey detached dwellings which are generally set back from front boundaries. Some of the dwellings on the road, including No 6 and the previously extended No 5 have side gabled roof forms. However, the wider street scene is varied in design and also includes for example the chalet bungalows at Nos 4 and [address] which incorporate large street facing gables. The nearby Thurnby and Bushby Conservation Area (CA), includes properties close to the junction of [address] with [address] and the appeal dwelling is visible from the junction. Due to the cul-de-sac arrangement, generous plot sizes, varied scale and mix of architecture styles, [address] has a mixed but attractive suburban character.

Given the offset position of the neighbouring dwelling at No 5 relative to the alignment of the junction of [address] with [address], the host dwelling is substantively seen in its own context in views from the junction. Therefore, even though the front projecting gable would differ in orientation to the original roof lines of these dwellings, it would add architectural interest to the appeal dwelling when seen in this view. It would also sit comfortably within the varied scale and eclectic architectural context of its more immediate surroundings when experienced in the vicinity of the head of the cul-de-sac. The complementary buff brick finish to the external walls, would further ensure that the proposal would be a harmonious addition to the existing building.

The significance of the CA largely derives from its historic layout and the more often traditional built form. Given my findings and having regard to its position set away from the boundary with the CA, evidently within a more modern residential setting, I agree with the Council that the development would not harm the significance of this nearby heritage asset.

I conclude, the development would have an acceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area. In that regard, it would comply with the requirements for development to be of a high quality design which respects and enhances local character and distinctiveness in Policy GD8 (Good design in development) of The Harborough Local Plan (2019).

[name] have found that the proposal would not result in an undesirable visual effect in this particular instance, I am also satisfied that it would meet the general requirements of the guidance in the Harborough District Council Development Management Supplementary Planning Document (2021).

Given work has already commenced, a condition setting a timescale for implementation is not necessary. A condition confirming the approved drawings is required in the interests of certainty. The approved drawings confirm that bricks and roof tiles are to match the existing dwelling but do not confirm the finish to the timber panelling on the front and rear gables. Therefore, a condition requiring confirmation of this is necessary to ensure the precise appearance of the finished scheme best complements the host dwelling and the street scene.

I have been provided with the comments of the Council’s ecologist who confirmed during the planning application process that no objections were raised subject to a condition requiring the installation of bat and swift nesting boxes. Such a condition is reasonable given it is consistent with the biodiversity aims of Policy GI5 (Biodiversity and geodiversity) of the LP and the National Planning Policy Framework.

For the reasons given the appeal is allowed.