Appeal 3355536

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing garage and outbuildings and erection of replacement garage / home office, at [site address] , in accordance with the terms of the application, PA23/00809, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

A revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published December 2024. The decision is based on the current Framework.

The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host dwelling with particular regard to its status as a non-designated heritage asset.

[site address] is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA) by the Council’s Historic Environment Planning Officer, due to it having historic, cultural, and architectural merit. Its significance as an NDHA derives from its relationship to the demolished church and consequential high residential status within the community. The appellants do not dispute this matter.

The Framework defines a heritage asset as: ‘A building, monument, site, place, area, or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. It includes assets identified by the local planning authority (including local listing).’ The Planning Practice Guidance provides that it is important that all NDHAs are clearly identified as such.

[site address] is a large residential dwelling constructed mainly of stone. It has a hipped roof and large windows and doors, all of which have a pleasant symmetry adding to its pleasing and yet imposing nature. The building appears to face south with a symmetrical elevation facing towards a large garden; however, the west elevation has a large door and porch which receives traffic from the highway at the end of a long tree lined driveway and is the first visual elevation available when entering the site. To the north elevation there is a lean-to and to the east there appears to be a large extension under construction. The grounds are extensive, and the old churchyard is to the north of the appeal site, but the church has been demolished.

Planning has been granted under reference PA23/00063 which significantly alters the design and appearance of the original [name]. The Council maintains that the west elevation remains largely intact; however, it would be significantly changed with a large addition to the north elevation which has a significant impact on the visual appreciation of the west and north elevations. The effect is to reinforce the west elevation as the dominant elevation. Works have begun, as I noted on my site visit.

Furthermore, planning permission has been granted in the grounds to the south of the appeal site under planning reference PA24/05386 for ‘Reserved matters application for access, landscaping, appearance, layout and scale following outline approval PA21/04457 dated 14.07.21 for construction of up to two dwellings.’

The appeal proposal would introduce a large, double storey incidental building to the south side of the driveway on approach towards the western elevation of [site address] . The size, scale and mass of the western elevation is significantly increased by the granted permission reference PA23/00063, as is the host dwelling overall. The ridgeline of the proposal would be below that of the host dwelling, underlining its subservience to the significant mass of the host dwelling. Whilst the location of the proposal would be closer than the demolished outbuilding it would nonetheless remain subservient in scale and appearance to the host dwelling.

The simple north and west elevations of the proposal, which are the elevations which would be the most visible when viewing [site address] , would present a utilitarian façade. The simple windows and doors would give the appeal building the impression of a barn and the proposal to use an outside stairwell to the first floor on the west elevation of the appeal proposal, would further strengthen the utilitarian design. The simplicity and small windows are repeated on the south elevation and despite the east elevation having a large gable window, it would be hidden from most views. In addition, it is not uncommon to see converted barns that have large loading openings on the first floor. The use of a simple rectangular footprint and pitched roof further signals the building’s utilitarian nature and is in direct contrast to the imposing and visually interesting [name].

The orientation of the building west to east would follow the orientation of the driveway on its approach to the west elevation of [site address] and as such would funnel views to the house whilst creating a boundary to the approved development to the south. The utilitarian façade and subservient appearance of the building would reinforce its incidental nature. The use of matching materials to the host dwelling would draw the two buildings together, signalling their attachment and reducing any visual competition. Furthermore, the design of the proposal draws influence from the approved permission PA24/05386 in so far as it has a similar simple rectangular footprint and simple pitched roof, thus knitting the proposal to other approved developments in the immediate vicinity.

Consequently, the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of [site address] or its setting and would not, therefore, diminish its significance. As such the proposal would conserve the NDHA. Accordingly, the proposal would comply with Policies 1, 2, 12 and 24 of the Cornwall Local Plan Strategic Policies 2010-2030, Policy C1 of the Climate Emergency Development Plan Document 2023, the relevant paragraphs of the Framework, and paragraph 3.2.1 of the [name] 2021, in so far as they seek high-quality, well-designed development that conserves the historic environment.

The Council have noted a number of other case numbers in their Questionnaire; however, I have not been directed towards the relevance of these cases to the subject appeal nor have I been provided with any detailed evidence of those cases.

I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council against the requirements of the Planning Practice Guidance and the Framework. Where necessary, and in the interests of clarity and precision, I have altered the wording of conditions to better reflect the relevant guidance. In addition to the standard three-year period implementation condition, which is a statutory requirement, it is necessary, in the interest of certainty and precision, to define the plans with which the appeal scheme should accord.

The Council have suggested a condition requiring that the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including their method of fixing, should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and that the development should be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter. Given the status of the host dwelling, and the relationship with the incidental outbuilding, it is necessary that such a condition be implemented to strengthen that relationship.

The Council have suggested a condition requiring that the development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations set out within Section 5 of the [name] by [name] dated October 2023. It is necessary that the development adheres to the ecological recommendations of the above report in the interest of protected species.

The Council have suggested a condition requiring that the proposal hereby approved shall only be used for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse known as [site address] . It is necessary in the interests of conserving the significance of the NDHA that the proposed building be subject to such a condition.

For the reasons given above, the appeal scheme would comply with the development plan and there are no material considerations worthy of sufficient weight (including the Framework) which would indicate a decision other than in accordance therewith. I therefore recommend the appeal be allowed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed.

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: Site/location Plan 3022.1.100, Existing 3022.1.220, Proposed 3022-3-100 B, Proposed 3022.3.305 B, Proposed 3022-3-200 C.

No development above ground level shall take place until details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces (stonework/pointing/slate hung cladding/roof slates, including method of fixing/ridge tiles/windows/doors) of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

The building hereby permitted shall be used solely for purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling known as [site address] , Penmarth, Carnmenellis, Redruth, Cornwall [postcode] .

The approved development must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations set out within section 5 of the [name] by [name] dated October 2023.