Appeal 3298556

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.

The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the dwelling and the wider area, including the landscape and scenic beauty of the ANOB.

[site address] is a traditional two-storey coastal property finished externally in textured render, with a red clay tile hipped roof. The property appears to have been extended with single storey lean-to additions in matching materials. However, the original dwelling remains the dominant structure and its well-balanced proportions have been retained. A detached garage, constructed from matching materials, with a pitched roof is situated to the rear.

The property is prominently located atop a cliff in the South Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), within a heritage coast designation and can be viewed from wide ranging locations throughout the far reaching [name] (SWCP), [address], and [site address] itself. The front elevation is particularly prominent but the rear is also clearly visible from the public domain.

Rendered and painted masonry and red clay tiles are the predominant materials in the surrounding area, with occasional use of blue slate. Those materials, combined with traditional roof forms and building footprints are integral to the local distinctiveness of the coastal area and therefore to the AONB. The appeal property combines all of those features and is an attractive example which adds to the character of the area.

The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) requires that great weight is given to the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the AONB.

To the front, the balcony design would relate well to the traditional style of the original building, despite the misalignment of the first-floor window heads, as would the sympathetically designed Oriel window to the south elevation, which would be appreciated in public views. However, whilst the zinc roof cladding for the wrap around extension is a high-quality material of itself, it would appear heavy and dark, jarring against the small red clay tiles of the original building and surrounding properties. Rather than appearing as a lightweight modern addition that would enable the existing form of the building to be appreciated, the uncharacteristically dark materials would draw the eye and appear unsympathetic in the local context. The result would be a visually dominant extension that would detract from and compete for prominence with the host property.

Although the garage would be subservient to the main dwelling in scale the zinc cladding would add substantially to the extent of what is an unsuitably dark material. Whilst the appellant maintains that the material would bring unity to the scheme, the combined mass of the alien material across both additions would dominate views to the rear of the property, reducing the ability to appreciate the attractive quality of the original property. In addition, the large monopitch roof of the garage would not relate well to the traditional hip, nor the steep monopitch roofs of the previous extensions/alterations.

Moreover, the form and design of the feature roof windows within the original property would not match any existing fenestration, would break the eaves line, and therefore appear as an incongruous alteration.

Whilst the Plymouth & South West Devon Joint Local Plan 2014-2034 (the Local Plan) policies do not specify resistance to modern materials, and in some circumstances high quality, innovative modern design can sit juxtaposed to traditional properties and still fit in with the overall form and layout of their surroundings, that would not be the case in this instance for the reasons given. The appeal proposal does not have proper regard to the pattern of local development, the wider context, and surroundings in terms of style and local distinctiveness.

In some circumstances it may be possible to overcome the harm identified by agreeing a suitably worded materials condition. However, the scheme has been designed specifically with the proposed materials in mind and conditions would not overcome my concerns in relation to the form of the garage roof and east elevations windows.

In conclusion, and for the reasons identified above, the proposal would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the dwelling and the wider area. Given the importance that national and local policy put on achieving good design, the harm to the character and appearance of the area carries very substantial weight. In addition, the proposal would harm the landscape and scenic beauty of the ANOB, to which I have applied great weight.

Accordingly, the proposal would fail to comply with Policies DEV20, DEV23, DEV24 and DEV25 of the Local Plan, and Policies HBE3 and ENV2 of the South Huish Neighbourhood Development Plan (2021), insofar as they require development to have proper regard to the pattern of local development and local distinctiveness and require development to protect and maintain the unique ANOB and Heritage Coast landscape. The proposal would also fail to comply with the guidance contained within Appendix 1 of the Plymouth and

and paragraphs 130, 134, 176 and 178 of the Framework.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, 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 with the recommendation and shall dismiss the appeal.