Appeal 3303369

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for single storey side and rear extensions to the dwelling and associated internal alterations in accordance with the terms of the application Ref S22/0722, dated 4 April 2022, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: SL-01, SL-02B, SL-03B, SL-04B and SL-05.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

Amended plans were submitted to the Council during consideration of the appeal application, reducing the size of the side extension. I understand that the Council based its decision on that revised proposal and I do likewise.

The main issue is whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Uffington Conservation Area and the setting of nearby listed buildings.

No [site address] occupies a corner plot on the end of a row of 4 single storey, semi-detached bungalows in a prominent position in the village conservation area, at the back of an area of open green space. There is a thatched roof grade II listed building, [address], to the rear and a row of handsome grade II listed estate workers cottages opposite, also on [address]. The Council’s Uffington Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan rightly emphasises the importance of this green space to the rural, open character of the village. The 4 modern bungalows on the north side of the open space are not positive features of the conservation area but their low height and straightforward design help to ensure that they do not detract from local character.

The proposal is for a single storey side extension wrapping around to the rear. The Council’s objection is to the side section, which would be seen partially in front of No 15 in important views along [address]. The extension detailed in the amended plans would not, however, project very far to the side of the existing bungalow. It would be very low in height, would sit well back from [address] to the side and would mainly be seen in front of what appears to be a modern extension to No 15. Its impact on views of that listed building would therefore be minimal. The proposed extension would furthermore be set well away from other nearby listed buildings, including the cottages opposite, so that it would not have any significant effect on their settings either.

The extension has also been designed to be fully subservient to the existing bungalow, being set back from the building’s frontage and down from its main roof height. It would cause some loss of symmetry for this pair of bungalows, but this is not an important characteristic of the building or the street scene. The proposal has been designed to work well on the corner plot, adding some interest to the form of No [address].

Sections 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 require special attention to be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas and the setting of listed buildings. Paragraph 199 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) furthermore says that great weight should be given to the conservation of heritage assets. In this case, I find that the proposal would not cause any material harm so I see no conflict with these priorities. The proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and the settings of nearby listed buildings. It therefore accords with the shared aims of policies DE1 and EN6 of the South Kesteven Local Plan 2011-2036 and the Framework, to secure high quality design that contributes to local distinctiveness and protects heritage assets.

I have considered all other points raised, including the comments of Uffington Parish Council. I see no reason why this small scale proposal should generate significant extra traffic or demand for on-street parking in the village. It seems to me that the extended bungalow would still be well placed to help meet the undoubted need for housing for the elderly.

I impose a condition specifying the relevant plans to provide certainty. A condition requiring the use of matching materials is also necessary, to protect the appearance of the conservation area and the setting of [address].

For the reasons set out above, I conclude that the appeal should succeed.