Appeal 3324689

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for essential maintenance works to replace roof at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 23/00299/FUL dated 28 February 2023.

There is reference made with regard to the appeal site falling within the buffer zone of the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site (DVMWHS). However, the Council accepts that the appeal scheme has no material effect on the DVMWHS. On the evidence before me, I have no reason to disagree and therefore will not address this matter further.

I have removed the reference to this being retrospective development in the description as this does not constitute development.

The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area, with specific reference to the Strutts Park Conservation Area (the SPCA).

The appeal property is three storeys in height, and according to the evidence provided, was formerly a public house, but now operates as a House in [name]. It is rendered to the front elevation but appears to be of brick construction and the brick remains exposed to some elevations. The roof material was apparently natural slate, but due to a maintenance issue, it was replaced by a fibre cement tile.

The SPCA is predominately residential to the north of the city centre and is Victorian in nature. There is an abundance of terraced properties, which transitions into larger semi-detached and detached properties, but still relatively traditional in nature. The significance of the SPCA appears to derive from the nature of its historic layout and traditional architecture, with some modern exceptions to both.

The Council are concerned with regard to the unsympathetic nature of the replacement material with regard to the SPCA. There appears to be no specific advice given with regard to the nature of roofing materials.

I note that original slate is still the principal choice of roofing materials, but of those replaced, demonstrated by less weathering, that there are a mix of materials used, which has subtly altered the nature of the rooflines. Whether many of these have obtained consent, I am not aware, but it has created changes to local character and appearance.

I find that the colour of the tiles is relatively consistent with surrounding dwellings, but the relatively unsullied appearance could give the impression of a jarring effect. Such an appearance will be prevalent until the tiles weather over time, and some limited weathering is beginning to take place. As this progresses, the colour and tone of the material will mellow and further integration will take place.

As such, I am satisfied that the new roofing material does not cause harm to the character and appearance of the SPCA or its heritage significance. I therefore find no conflict with policy CP20 of the Derby City Local Plan – Part 1 [name] (2017) or [name] E18 or E19 of the City of Derby Local Plan Review (2006), which amongst other matters, expect development to not have any detrimental impact on the significance of a heritage asset and preserve or enhance the special character of the Conservation Area.

[name] have found no harm to the significance of the designated heritage asset, it is not necessary to conduct the heritage balancing exercise of the National Planning Policy Framework and consider whether any public benefits exist to justify the development.

The Council are concerned with regard to this proposal setting a precedent in terms of future applications. This appeal has been dealt with on its own merits, with specific site circumstances in favour of the appeal proposal. Any subsequent appeals for similar development elsewhere would also be judged on their own merits and the context of the development.

As the works have already been carried out, there are no conditions necessary in this instance.

The Framework states that development that accords with the development plan should be approved without delay. There are no material considerations, taken individually or cumulatively, that indicate that the appeal should not succeed. Overall, I conclude that planning permission should be granted. [planning inspector] INSPECTOR