Appeal 3296995

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for creation of sustainable roof garden with internal access (revised scheme) at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref. 21/02045/HOU, dated 9 October 2021 and the plans submitted with it, and subject to the conditions listed below.

The development hereby permitted shall begin before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the following approved plan: 3052/1B.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and surrounding area, with particular regard to the sites location within the Ryde Conservation Area.

The appeal site lies within the Ryde Conservation Area (RCA). Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Area) Act 1990 requires, therefore, that special attention be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. Similar advice is to be found in the National Planning Policy Framework (July 2021) (Framework) and in policies DM2 and DM11 of the Isle of [name] & Development Management Development Plan Document (IOWCS) (March 2012).

The Councils ‘Ryde Conservation Area – Conservation Area Appraisal’ (CAA), dated April 2011, breaks down the RCA into individual ‘character areas’. The appeal site falls within ‘Character Area 3: Regency and [name] where the CAA summarises that its special interest arises from the eclectic mix of finely proportioned Regency and Victorian housing, mainly two or three storeys in height and constructed in stone or buff coloured brick or rendered in stucco. Some of the properties are sited within generous gardens that contribute to the feeling of openness, with the unifying linear street pattern providing views across Ryde and occasional glimpses of the sea.

In relation to The Strand, the CAA states that a number of the properties in this road are important to Ryde’s history and character, and that this ‘character area’ has a more open feel than other parts of RCA partly due to the number of large gardens. The CAA notes, in particular, that the rear gardens of the villas on The Strand, that back onto the Esplanade to the north, impact on the character and appearance of the Esplanade through softening the area between the existing open space and residential development. Whilst the CAA goes on to identify key views and vistas, there are no specific references to The Strand other than generally to the grid street pattern in the ‘character area’ enabling long views along straight leafy roads.

The appeal site comprises a modern mid-terraced three storey property located on the south side of The Strand, with rendered elevations under a timber flat roof. It forms part of a recent redevelopment of similar properties, some of which have brick elevations. There is no reference to the history of this development in the Council’s Delegated Report (CDP), but the [name] and [name] & Heritage Statement (D&AS) suggests that the whole development was built in around 2014. As such, its modern design contrasts with the mix of finely proportioned Regency and Victorian housing within the area, but, even so, the simple and unassuming appearance of the appeal building, its scale and other detailing, allows it and the development it forms part of to integrate reasonably well with the surrounding historic streetscene.

All of the above factors contribute to the character and appearance of the RCA, as a whole.

The CAA ‘[name] recognises that change is inevitable in the area and that an appropriate balance must be struck with the need to protect those historic features and architectural detailing that contribute towards the area’s importance. Together with the section on ‘General Guidelines’ the emphasis is, therefore, on managing change and preventing inappropriate extensions and alterations to the properties that form an important part of the history and character of the RCA. There are no specific guidelines on roof terraces.

The appeal proposal would involve the creation of a sustainable roof garden on the existing flat roof to the host property, accessed internally from a ladder via a small ‘roof access’. The proposed roof terrace would be enclosed by a glass or wired balustrade, surfaced in tiles and include low level planting and trees. Whilst it is not clear from the proposed roof plan, I have assumed that the balustrade would extend around all four sides of the new roof terrace. This appears, from the CDP, to be the basis on which the Council determined the application and also appears to be reaffirmed in the D&AS. The proposed balustrade and thus the new roof terrace, would be set back by approximately 1.8 metres from the main front and rear walls (elevations) to the host property.

Within the above context and as I observed on my site visit, the proposed balustrade and roof terrace would largely be hidden from public vantage points on The Strand and surrounding roads. [name] accept that proposed tree planting and other garden paraphernalia could be visible, there would only be the potential for glimpsed views and as such, these views would be limited and would not impact on any key views or vistas. Even so, the effective greening of the roof, though introducing a sustainable garden, would be a benefit in softening the appearance of the existing roof and its backdrop, and providing a green setting for what is a densely built up site with no formal gardens or amenity space other than some small terraces on the rear.

The appeal proposal would not result in the loss of or impact on any existing architectural detail of historic value or any feature, view or vista that contributes to the special importance of this ‘character area’ or the wider RCA. Similarly, the proposal would not materially alter the shape or form of the roof and due to the modern appearance of the development, with its flat roof, which distinguishes it from the older historic properties within The Strand, the proposed roof terrace would, in my judgement, sit comfortably on the appeal site and would not appear out of keeping.

For the above reasons, I do not agree with the Council and consider that the proposed roof terrace would not result in a discordant or incongruous feature. Any change in the appearance of this part of the streetscene would be minimal and would not result in any harm to the character or appearance of the RCA, as a whole.

Accordingly, I find that the proposed development would preserve the character and appearance of the RCA, as a whole, in that it would leave it unharmed, and would thus be in accord with policies DM2 and DM11 of the IOWCS and the corresponding policies of the Framework.

Concerns have been raised regarding loss of privacy and the absence of a heritage assessment. A brief heritage assessment was included in the D&AS. Even so, I have based my findings mainly on the CAA and my observations on site. In relation to privacy, there is no detailed evidence before me to suggest that this concern would result in any material harm and I note that this is not a matter that the Council have raised in their objection to the appeal proposal.

I have considered the suggested conditions against the advice in the Framework and the Planning Practice Guidance chapter on the use of planning conditions. A condition requiring compliance with the submitted plan is necessary and reasonable to reflect the details included in the application and to ensure a sustainable development.

For the reasons given above and having taken all the matters raised into account, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.