Appeal 3325592

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for Replacement windows fitted. Old single glazing windows replaced with PVC-U double glazed windows. At the front of the house it’s the downstairs living room bay window (which consists of 3 windows), upstairs it’s the bedroom window (1 window) at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref: [name]/23/00201 dated 5 February 2023, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin no 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: Existing elevations dated 5 May 2023; Proposed elevations dated 5 May 2023; Window specifications including sections through top and bottom sash, and Site Location Plan

As the proposal is in a conservation area (CA), I have paid special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of that area, as set out in section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act).

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the host property and surrounding area, with due regard to the location of the site in the Canterbury City CA.

The appeal property is a historic, two storey mid-terrace dwelling. [address] is defined by terraces of late Victorian houses on either side of the street. The houses are uniform in design with ground floor bay windows. The one-way street is narrow, and the houses’ front elevations adjoin the footway without any set back from the street.

The character of this part of the Canterbury City CA and its significance stems from, amongst other aspects, the arrangement of the uniformly designed, yellow brick terraced houses. The design and arrangement of fenestration with matching proportions on the front elevations also creates a pleasing architectural rhythm.

The Canterbury Conservation Area Appraisal (2010) identifies the intimate scale of the streets, unity of architecture and the presence of the [name] and associated open spaces as being of particular importance in this part of the CA, and as a whole. The appeal property’s relatively original condition, and overall appearance make a positive contribution to the significance of the CA.

The appeal property’s existing windows are timber sash windows. The appellant indicates they are generally in poor condition and at my site visit it was evident that many of the windows were in a poor state of repair.

Whilst the majority of properties still retain traditional timber sash windows, there are examples along [address], and the parallel street, [address], of uPVC replacements of various styles. Whilst some attempt to replicate the original patterns, others are to a much simpler design, with two rather than four panes, and top-hung casements rather than sliding sash.

Of the other replacement window examples, and of most relevance to the appeal proposal, are the replacement ‘conservation style’ uPVC windows at [address] and [address]. The appellant indicates, and it is not disputed by the Council, that both sets of replacement windows were granted planning permission within recent years and that the Council’s officer report for the [address] permission confirms that the principle of appropriately designed uPVC windows has been considered acceptable elsewhere within the immediate vicinity of the application site.

The submitted evidence suggests that the proposed windows’ sash profile would be the same as those at [address] and [address]. From the manufacturer’s information it is apparent that the sliding sash windows would feature decorative sash horns, mechanical joints, authentic putty lines, an external single astragal bar and white coloured smooth uPVC.

I fully support the Council’s aims in seeking to preserve the character and appearance of conservation areas, and acknowledge that in some cases the use of uPVC rather than timber can be harmful to the overall appearance of an individual building and hence the wider CA.

I accept that the proposed replacement uPVC windows would subtly alter the character and appearance of the host building and CA. Nonetheless, the submitted drawings show that the traditional pattern of two panes over two would be replicated, and the profiles of the glazing bars are reasonably slimline and well proportioned. Given that very similar replacement windows have previously been accepted by the Council on [address] and an adjoining street within the Canterbury City CA, I find that the replacement windows would not be an uncharacteristic addition.

Overall, I conclude that the proposed replacement windows would have a neutral effect that would preserve the character and appearance of the host building and the Canterbury City CA as a whole, causing no harm to its significance. Therefore, the question of public benefits to outweigh any harm does not arise. As such, I find no conflict with DBE3, DBE6, HE1 and HE6 of the Canterbury District Local Plan (2017) or the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) (the Framework). Collectively, these require proposals to protect, conserve and enhance the historic environment and the contribution it makes to local distinctiveness and sense of place.

I have considered the suggested conditions in light of the tests in the Framework and advice provided by the Planning Practice Guidance.

In addition to the standard time condition for commencement of development, a condition is needed to ensure that the development takes place in accordance with the approved plans, in order to provide certainty.

For the above reasons, and having had regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the proposed development would accord with the development plan and the Framework. The appeal is therefore allowed.