Appeal 3361602

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of existing single storey mono-pitched side extension containing the kitchen and a workshop, and erection of a two-storey dual pitched extension and replacement of the existing greenhouse at [site address] , Winster, Derbyshire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/DDD/1024/1142, 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: Location Plan, [name] and Elevation 530/P05B, Site Plan As Existing and Proposed 530/P06B, Comparison of Gables 530/P07.

All stonework, including any lintels, sills, quoins and surrounds shall be natural stone to match the existing dwelling.

All new door and window frames shall be of timber construction and recessed from the external face of the wall the same depth as existing frames and retained as such thereafter.

The rooflights shall be fitted flush with the roofslope and retained as such thereafter.

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved a nest box and a bat box shall be installed in accordance with section 4.10 of the submitted Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment reference 2022-015, and shall be retained thereafter.

The description of the proposal given on the planning application form contained elements that did not directly relate to acts of development. In the description of the proposal within my decision, I have therefore removed these superfluous elements in the interests of clarity.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal upon the character and appearance of the area.

As the appeal site is in the Peak District National Park (‘NP’), I am mindful of the requirement to seek to further the purposes of it, which includes conserving its natural beauty and cultural heritage. Paragraph 189 of the National Planning Policy Framework (‘the Framework’) states that NPs have the highest status of protection, and that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing their landscape and scenic beauty. The special qualities of the NP, include amongst other things, and of particular relevance to this appeal, its characteristic settlements with strong communities and traditions.

The appeal property is a residential property of stone construction and with a slate roof, located within the environs of Winster. The property is located on land that gently rises to the south and adjoins pasture.

The dwelling is of relatively large proportions and is unusual in that it does not address [address] itself, instead the front elevation is east facing, parallel to the road. This is explained, partly by the attached [address], which is a subservient additional element of the building which effectively forms a gable fronted cottage attached to the northern gable of the appeal property, and which directly addresses the road.

The appeal proposal would primarily concern the southern elevation of the property, which although a gable end, is the furthest elevation of the property from the road, and also the most screened from public viewpoints. The Authority has raised no particular concerns with regard to the size or general design of the appeal proposal. Indeed, in these respects the appeal proposal is similar to a scheme previously granted planning permission in 20241, and I have no reason to reach a different conclusion to the Authority on these matters.

Rather, the concerns of the Authority focus solely upon the approach to fenestration within the appeal proposal, in that the proposal before me incorporates four sliding sash windows within the southern elevation, with two windows at first floor level located directly over two windows at ground floor level.

The Peak District National Park Authority Design Guide (‘the [name]) sets out guidelines in relation to detailing, and identifies three key main characteristics of traditional elevations; a balance of proportions between the overall shape of the walls and the openings they contain, a high solid-to-void ratio in which the wall dominates, and a simple arrangement of openings, usually formal (often symmetrical) in the case of houses. 1 NP/DDD/0324/0278

With specific regard to solid-to-void ratio, the [name] goes on to highlight the importance of openings being balanced by a complementary area of solid walling alongside. It is highlighted that gables within the NP were traditionally left blank to maintain structural integrity. It also establishes minimising the number of openings on gables, arranging openings with care, and maintaining a high solid-to-void ratio as basic design principles. The Peak District National Park Alterations and [name] Planning Document highlights the importance of harmonising extensions and alterations with existing dwellings.

By containing four windows in the side elevation, the appeal proposal would not be strictly in accordance with the advice within the [name] in terms of minimising openings. However, the proposed windows would not be excessive in size or unacceptably proportioned. Although not centrally located within the side elevation, they would be formally arranged and balanced, and in doing so would reflect the overall character of the dwelling.

Both the front and rear elevations of the appeal property contain numerous windows, with a formal arrangement to the front elevation and more informal and less hierarchical approach to the rear. Overall, and also taking account of the number of windows within the adjoining cottage, the dwelling and its neighbour do not exhibit a noticeably heavy appearance and the solid-to-void ratio proposed within the side elevation would not be noticeably different to that exhibited in other elevations of the building, including the adjoining cottage.

There is no indication that the number of windows proposed would exceed those required to adequately light and ventilate the relevant rooms, or result in a solid-to-void ratio would constitute a reversal of the balance. Nor would the incorporation of four windows in the southern elevation lead to a weakening of the predominant local form of side elevation solidity given the existing presence of the adjoining cottage and its associated windows at the northern side of the appeal property.

Moreover, the proposed windows would face directly away from, and would be entirely screened from public viewpoints along, [address], and I have not been directed to any other public vantage points. Therefore, although the number of windows proposed would not wholly accord with advice within the [name], no unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the area would result.

Taking the above together, I conclude that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the area. It would accord with Policies GSP1 and GSP3 of the Peak District National Park Local Development Framework Core Strategy and Policies DMC3 and DMH7 of the Peak District National Park Development [name], which together and among other factors, state that all development should be consistent with the purposes of the NP, that development must respect, conserve and enhance all valued characteristics, with particular attention paid to impact on the character and setting of buildings and design in accordance with the Authority’s Design Guide.

In reaching this conclusion, and for the same reasons, I am also satisfied that the proposal would conserve the special qualities of the NP, and therefore the purposes of the NP would be furthered.

I have attached a condition relating to the time period for the implementation of the development [1] and for it to be carried out in accordance with the submitted plans [2] in the interests of clarity and the character and appearance of the area. Conditions [3] and [4] relating to use of appropriate materials, and relating to the position of the proposed rooflights [5] are also necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the area. I have also attached a condition [6] in order to ensure that there is no harm to protected species.

For the reasons given above, the proposal complies with the development plan as a whole. There are no considerations which suggest that a decision should be taken other than in accordance with it. I therefore conclude that the appeal should be allowed.