Appeal 3307730

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for two storey rear extension; carport changing to integral garage; new front porch; new rear dormer; new detached garden room/office at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/01041/FUL, dated 26 May 2022, and the plans submitted with it, 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: • 22-010-08 Site and Location Plan • 22-010-07 Block Plan • 22-010-04 Proposed Ground Floor Plan • 22-010-05 Amended Proposed First Floor Plan • 22-010-06 [name] • 22-010-09 [name] • 22-010-11 Amended Proposed Section

Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved external materials specified on the Amended Proposed Elevations Plan (ref. 22-010-06) and Amended Proposed Section (ref. 22-010-11). These materials shall be retained thereafter.

Prior to the construction of the [name], details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the [name] hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and those materials shall be retained thereafter.

The appellant submitted amended versions of the Proposed First Floor Plan (ref. 22-010-05) and [name] (ref. 22-010-06) during the determination of the planning application. The references weren’t amended, and the different revisions weren’t noted. As such, the plans originally submitted with the application have the same reference as those submitted during the determination of the application. The Proposed First Floor Plan and [name] plans approved within Condition 2, are those submitted during the determination of the planning application.

The main issues of the appeal are: • the effect of the proposed two storey rear extension on the character and appearance of Bingham Conservation Area; and, • the effect of the proposed two storey rear extension on the living conditions of neighbouring residents.

The appeal site is located within the Bingham Conservation Area. The special interest of the Conservation Area includes the historic setting of Bingham. Whilst the Council has identified no harm to the Church of St. Mary and [name], there are a number of views towards it that contribute to the character and appearance and its significance as an early part of the town. The Townscape Appraisal identifies that the properties adjoining the site on [name] are key unlisted buildings and there are views from [name] across the appeal site towards the church. It appears to me that the views from here contribute to the character and appearance and help understand the Conservation Area’s significance as a designated heritage asset.

The appeal property is a relatively modern development within the Conservation Area. There are a variety of house types and design within [address], but the appeal property appears similar in style to [address] (No. 11) and both are set back from the road. There are also a range of alterations and extensions to properties within the area. The proposed extension would include materials which are in keeping with the appeal property and therefore it would be viewed as another sympathetic extension in the area.

There are broken views of the Church of St. Mary and [name] from [name], but they are disrupted by the properties immediately adjacent to the appeal site. The proposed extension would screen some views of the Church, but the effect would not be significant as views from this part of [name] are through intermittent narrow gaps that do not make a significant contribution to the significance of the CA overall. Whilst views from the rear windows and gardens of the properties on [name] towards the Church would be affected, most properties would still enjoy an unbroken view of the church. Whilst private views of the church from properties on [name] would be affected, there is no particular evidence to suggest these views make a contribution to the significance of the Conservation Area.

The proposed two storey rear extension would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the Bingham Conservation Area, and therefore would avoid harming its significance. The proposed extension would therefore comply with Policy 11 of the Rushcliffe Local Plan, Rushcliffe Local Plan Part 1: [name], December 2014 and Policy 28 of the Rushcliffe Local Plan, Rushcliffe Local Plan Part 2: Land and Planning Policies Adopted, October 2019 (LPP). These policies require proposals to conserve the setting of the historic environment and consider the significance of the assets and identify the impact of development upon them.

The proposed two storey rear extension would be sited away from the boundary with No. 11. The proposed extension would build on top of the existing ground floor extension and only extend slightly further into the rear garden. The rear windows of No. 11 would only offer angled views of the proposed extension.

Whilst the appeal scheme would lead to a slightly altered outlook from the rear windows of No. 11, the occupiers would still be able to look out a significant distance across their rear garden. The appeal scheme would have a minimal effect on the outlook enjoyed by the occupiers of No. 11 and as such it would not have an overbearing effect upon them.

Although the proposed extension would extend above and further than the existing single storey extension and cause some obstruction to views of the church from dwelling on [name], the residents of these properties would still be able to look out a significant distance across their gardens and either side of the appeal property. The appeal scheme would therefore not harmfully affect the outlook enjoyed by residents of properties on [name].

Given the orientation of the properties, the extension would not have an impact on the amount of sunlight experienced by residents of the properties on [name]. As the proposed extension is located close to the boundary of the properties on [name] it may reduce the amount of daylight experienced in the garden, but not to harmful extent.

The proposed extension would not increase the amount of first floor windows within the side elevation facing the properties on [name]. The existing ground floor window would be replaced with a floor to ceiling window; however, it would be largely screened by the existing boundary treatment. The Juliet balcony would offer angled views of the rear gardens of properties on [name] but would primarily look out across the garden of the appeal property. Whilst the proposed Juliet balcony would increase overlooking of the rear gardens it would not be by a significant amount.

The proposed [name] is sited a significant distance from neighbouring properties and well screened by existing boundary treatments and outbuildings within the rear garden of No. 11. The proposed garden room would therefore not have a harmful effect on the outlook enjoyed by neighbouring residents.

I conclude that the proposed two storey rear extension would not have a harmful effect on the living conditions of neighbouring residents. The appeal scheme therefore complies with LPP Policy 1 which indicates that proposals will be granted, provided that there is no significant adverse effect upon residential amenity of adjoining properties.

Any construction noise would be temporary and small scale given the size of the proposed development. Whilst there might be alternative ways of providing additional accommodation at the site, I must consider the proposal before me, and have found that it would be acceptable. The effect on house prices is not a matter that affects my consideration of the main issues.

I acknowledge comments made by neighbours in relation to a lack of pre-application engagement. However, pre-application engagement is not a prerequisite for submitting a planning application of this nature. As such, this has not affected my assessment of the acceptability of the appeal scheme.

In the interest of certainty conditions specifying a time limit to implement the proposed development and approved plans is required. To ensure that the proposed extension is in keeping with the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, conditions specifying external materials, and the submission of details of the materials for the [name] are required.

The proposed development complies with the development plan when considered as a whole and there are no material considerations, either individually or in combination, that outweigh this.

For the reasons given I conclude that the appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted.