Appeal 3358688

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of a timber car port at [site address] , Surlingham, Norfolk [postcode] . The permission is granted in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 2024/3239, dated 30 October 2024, 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: location plan, car port location, 2404-00-001 (plans and elevations).

The main issue is the effect of the proposed cart port on the character and appearance of the street scene.

The appeal property is a two storey detached dwelling in a residential road of mixed dwelling types, within a village setting.

Policy DM3.8 of the South Norfolk Local Plan Development [name] (2015) and Policy 2 of the Greater Norwich Local Plan (2024) require high quality design from development and protection and enhancement of locally distinctive character.

Properties on the western side of [address] are laid out on a consistent building line with relatively generous front gardens, giving the street scene an open and spacious character. There are no other obvious examples of detached car ports or garages within the immediate street scene. As such, I acknowledge that the car port would be an uncharacteristic feature in this location.

However, its position to the front and side of the dwelling would not be unusual for this type of outbuilding and it would not obscure views of the host dwelling. It would be a modest structure designed to accommodate a single vehicle and, therefore, of limited scale utilising materials appropriate to the village setting. Consequently, it would be discreet and unobtrusive, positioned close to the existing garage and shared boundary.

As a result of its scale and position it would not compete visually with the host dwelling or otherwise appear cramped or an incongruous form of overdevelopment. The tall boundary hedge to the side and front will also reduce its visual impact in this location, while its limited scale, open side and frontage will limit its presence as a built form. While the hedge is not a permanent feature and more extensive views of the structure will be possible when it is not in leaf, this needs to be balanced with the above findings. Taking these matters as a whole, the car port would not result in material harm to the street scene.

I acknowledge the Council’s concern that allowing this proposal could set a precedent for further development. However, I am mindful of the principle that development proposals must be considered on their individual merits and I have found above that no unacceptable harm would result from the current proposal. Any future development proposals would need to be similarly considered on their merits against policies and circumstances pertaining at the time. However, current concerns about such proposals coming forward are not of sufficient weight to lead to a different overall conclusion in this case.

Therefore, for these reasons, I conclude that the proposed cart port would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the street scene. Consequently, there is no conflict with Policy DM3.8 of the South Norfolk Local Plan Development [name] and Policy 2 of the Greater Norwich Local Plan, as described.

For the reasons given, the appeal is allowed. Of the Council’s suggested conditions I have imposed the standard time condition and, to ensure the proper implementation of the proposal, one requiring development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans.