Appeal 6002151

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the demolition of sheds and greenhouse and erection of a dwelling and garage at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2025/02476, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

An amended Block Plan1 was submitted as part of the appeal which the appellant indicates provides clarification of the separation distances between [address] and the proposed dwelling. It does not appear to be materially different to that submitted with the application, and considered by the Council, accordingly no injustice would occur should I accept the plan. For the avoidance of doubt, I have determined the appeal based on the revised block plan.

The main issues are: • whether the development would be in a suitable location, with particular regard to the settlement strategy, character and appearance of the area and access to services and facilities; • the effect of the proposed development on the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties; and • the effect on the River Avon Special Area of Conservation. 1 Drawing number 2323-4a

The appeal site forms part of the side garden of a semi-detached dwelling known as [address]. The appeal proposal would see the demolition of the existing shed and greenhouse, the sub-division of the site and the erection of a new dwellinghouse and garage.

Core Policy 1 of the [name] adopted January 2015 (WCS) sets out the settlement strategy for the area and includes a hierarchy of settlements to which sustainable development will be directed. It indicates that development at Large and [name] will be limited to that needed to help meet the housing needs of settlements and to improve employment opportunities, services and facilities.

Core Policy 2 of the WCS outlines the strategy for the delivery of development in a sustainable manner. It states that, other than in circumstances as permitted by other policies within the WCS, development will not be permitted outside the limits of development, as defined on the policies map. Specifically, at the [name], development will be limited to infill within the existing built area and will be supported where it seeks to meet, among other things, the housing needs of settlements, provided that specific criteria are met. These include that the development respects the existing character and form of the settlement; does not elongate the village or impose development in sensitive landscape areas; and does not consolidate an existing sporadic loose knit areas of development related to the settlement. Core Policy 17 of the WCS, sets out the spatial strategy for the Mere Community Area and that development should be in accordance with the [name] set out in Core Policy 1.

Core Policy 17 identifies Semley/[name] as a Small Village. It is also described as such on the Allocations/Strategic Sites Plan for Land at Mere and consequently does not have a settlement boundary. I note the Council’s contention that, despite its name, the Small Village excludes clusters of development beyond the confines of the built-up extent of Semley, including [name] and [address]. However, the extent of the [name] is not clearly defined on the policies map. Moreover, it has not been demonstrated how the type of facilities recorded in the Community Area of Semley, as part of the evidence base for the settlement strategy2, would be determinative of the extent of the settlement, as suggested by the Council.

The appeal site is located within an area described as [address], which comprises a small cluster of dwellings. While separated from the main built-up form of Semley by intervening agricultural land, the group lies a short distance from and relates closely to it, such that it would likely function as one. Taking the above factors into account, the appeal site would therefore fall to be considered as part of a Small Village, and the proposal would comprise limited infilling within the existing built area.

My attention is drawn by the Council to an appeal at [address] 3 whereby the Inspector reached a different conclusion in considering whether the appeal site 2 Topic paper 3: [name] [name] 2012 3 Appeal Ref: APP/Y3940/W/24/3352933 was located within the existing built area. However, this appears to be in a different location, thereby the circumstances have not been shown to be comparable.

Residential development at [address] includes detached, semi-detached and terraced two storey and single storey properties on plots of various shapes and sizes. The introduction of a new dwelling as proposed, would inevitably change the character of the appeal site. Although the proposed development would reduce the size of the plot on which [address] sits, and in doing so it would be smaller than that of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling, the remaining gap between the flank elevation of the host dwelling and the proposed new dwelling would maintain a degree of separation between the built form so as to ensure a sense of separation. This, together with the space between the proposed dwelling and [address], would serve to retain the general sense of spaciousness within this part of the group and would ensure the longer distance views across [address] towards the open countryside beyond would not be unduly disrupted.

Despite being larger than the neighbouring modest semi-detached dwellings, the new dwelling, albeit a single property, would not be dissimilar in terms of overall scale, height and design to the adjoining dwellings when viewed as a pair. Furthermore, the garden space to serve both the existing and proposed dwellings, including rear and front amenity areas, would be commensurate with the size of the dwellings and would provide an appropriate level of outdoor space to meet the needs of the occupiers. Considering these matters, the proposal would therefore not be significantly at odds with the existing character and form of this part of the settlement. Moreover, the siting of the proposed dwelling is such that it would not extend beyond the existing built form so as to elongate the village.

As the site is within the [name] and West Wiltshire Downs National Landscape (NL), there is a duty upon me, as the decision maker, to seek to further the purposes of this protected landscape. The National Planning Policy Framework sets out that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The site is visible from the surrounding open countryside as well as public vantage points, including the public right of way which is coterminous with the side boundary of the site. Nevertheless, given the overall scale and siting of the development, including its close relationship with the existing residential development in the group, within which the proposed dwelling would be seen, the proposal would be consistent with furthering the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the NL and would not harm the visual qualities and essential characteristics of the NL in terms of its landscape and scenic beauty. Furthermore, I note that the Council is satisfied that, subject to the use of appropriate external materials, the proposal would conserve the special character and appearance of the NL.

While not a formal arrangement, the existing cluster of dwellings, despite the gaps between the buildings, nonetheless forms a consolidated group, comprising a relatively continuous row of residential properties that does not appear as particularly sporadic or scattered. The proposed dwelling, which would fill a gap within the existing group, would therefore not consolidate a sporadic loose knit area of development. Accordingly, the proposal would not conflict with the aims of Core Policy 2 in these regards.

The appeal site is in a rural location, a short distance from facilities within the centre of Semley, including a church, primary school, village shop and public house, which the appellant indicates can be accessed via a public right of way (PROW), with a walking distance of between approximately 450-800m. There are also office, business and retail premises at [address], not far from the site, and commercial uses at [name].

I appreciate that, due to physical constraints, including the unmade terrain, the PROW may provide only limited genuine options for walking from the appeal site to the amenities in Semley. Despite this, the route would nevertheless be walkable for at least some residents and would provide an opportunity to access facilities by means other than the private car. In addition, due to the relatively modest distance between the site and the centre of Semley, as well as the other services and facilities in the area, there would also be opportunities for local journeys to be made by bicycle.

While it would be possible for future occupiers to either walk or cycle to access some day -to-day services and amenities, the number of journeys undertaken by means other than the private car are likely to be limited. As such, the proposed development would not benefit from a genuine choice of transport modes. In that regard the proposal would not strictly accord with the aims of [name] 60 and 61 of the WCS, which set out that new development should be located to reduce the need to travel, particularly by private car, and to encourage the use of sustainable transport alternatives.

Set against this, I am mindful that the National Planning Policy Framework recognises that opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary between urban and rural areas, and this should be taken into account in both plan-making and decision-making. In this case, given the dispersed nature of facilities and amenities in the area generally, future occupiers of the development would be likely to be reliant on the private car for a considerable number of journeys. In addition, I am also mindful that, as I have found that the site falls within a Small Village for the purposes of Core Policy 2, this would suggest that, like other residential development in the vicinity, the future occupiers of the dwelling would benefit from some accessibility to services and amenities by means other than the private car. Thus, taking these factors into account, I attach limited weight to the conflict with [name] 60 and 61 of the WCS.

In light of these considerations, the development would therefore be in a suitable location, with particular regard to the settlement strategy and character and appearance of the area. Accordingly, it would not conflict with the aims of [name] 1, 2, 17, or Core Policy 57 of the WCS which requires new development to be of a high standard of design, and among other things, relates effectively to the immediate setting and to the wider character of the area, taking account of the characteristics of the site and the local context. While it would give rise to conflict with [name] 60 and 61 of the WCS, having regard to access to services and facilities, for the reasons above I attach limited weight to this conflict. Therefore, on this main issue, the proposal would not conflict with the development plan read as a whole.

The flank wall of the new dwelling would be parallel with that of [address]. It would be set back from the side boundary of the site between the properties, which is offset from the side elevation of [address] and would not project beyond its rear elevation. I noted at my site visit there are several windows in the side elevation of [address] which face towards the appeal site. The position of the new dwelling directly adjacent to these windows would be likely to lead to a reduction in levels of light, particularly in the morning, and outlook from these openings.

However, this would be mitigated to a degree by the space between the buildings, together with the position of the new dwelling and overall width, scale and bulk of the side gable facing towards [address], the result of which would allow for light to reach the windows and ensure the built form would not appear unduly imposing when viewed from these openings. Moreover, the ground floor rooms to the front and rear of [address] are also served by openings to the front and rear elevations, which would provide an outlook from these rooms and ensure adequate levels of light. Thus, the proposal would ensure appropriate living conditions for future occupiers of [address] in that regard.

The Council has also raised concern regarding overlooking of [address] from the openings in the west elevation of the proposed dwelling. Any overlooking and subsequent loss of privacy arising from the 2 ground floor windows in this elevation, which would serve a dining area/sitting room could be avoided using appropriate boundary treatment between the properties. This could be secured by a suitable planning condition. In addition, it would not be unreasonable to impose a condition to require the first-floor en-suite window to the west elevation to be obscure glazed, to prevent any direct overlooking of the adjoining property.

Furthermore, given the relatively modest number of vehicular movements likely to be generated by a single dwelling, any effects in terms of light from car headlights or noise and disturbance from motor vehicles would be unlikely to give rise to material harm to the living conditions of the occupiers of [address].

For the foregoing reasons I therefore conclude that the proposed development would not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of the neighbouring properties. In that regard the proposal would not conflict with Core Policy 57 of the WCS in so far as it seeks development if a high-quality design which is expected, among other things, to achieve appropriate levels of amenity.

The appeal site is within the catchment of the River Avon Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The SAC is a European site designated under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (the regulations) which impose a duty on the competent authority to consider whether the development would have a significant effect, either alone or in combination with other development, on the conservation objectives of the site, within the framework of an Appropriate Assessment.

The Annex I qualifying features for this site which fall to be considered are ‘watercourses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation’. [name] species present include internationally important populations of Desmoulin’s whorl snail, sea lamprey, brook lamprey, Atlantic salmon and bullhead. The Council’s updated [name] Assessment4 (SAA), agreed with Natural England, sets out that elevated levels of phosphorus are preventing the conservation objectives for the SAC from being achieved and causing the river to be in unfavourable condition. Development within the river catchment, including the proposed dwelling at the site, in combination with other development, have the potential to contribute to elevated phosphorus through foul water discharge from sewage treatment works and package treatment plants.

The SAA explains that potential adverse effects of new residential development are capable of being mitigated through a strategic approach funded by developer contributions via planning obligations. The phosphorus neutrality strategy includes a Council-led mitigation scheme, whereby mitigation credits are available to purchase at a fixed cost per kilogram of phosphorus, either from the Council or an approved third party. The Council has confirmed that the nutrient calculation submitted as part of the proposal is acceptable and would enable the appellant to formally apply for credits as part of the Council-led mitigation scheme. Consequently, a completed unilateral undertaking (UU) pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 has been submitted as part of the appeal to secure a financial contribution towards the phosphorus mitigation scheme to mitigate against any adverse effects on the SAC, in accordance with the SAA. Provision is also made within the UU to ensure the installation and maintenance of an appropriate package treatment plant.

Following appropriate assessment under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, I am, therefore, satisfied that adverse effects on the integrity of the SAC will be avoided. I also note that, as measures proposed to mitigate for all identified adverse effects that could potentially occur as a result of the proposal are appropriately secured, Natural England has no objection to the proposal.

Whether any permission which may be required for vehicular access to the property, either by the privately maintained bridge across the [name] or alternatively by [address], has been obtained separately by the appellant, would be a private matter for the relevant parties to resolve.

It is not disputed that the renovation of [address], which I understand is currently vacant, would enable the property to be brought back into use and contribute to local housing stock. However, I have not been directed to any policy requirement for such work to be undertaken prior to the construction of a new dwelling as proposed. In addition, the availability or otherwise of a funding initiative for the replacement septic tank is not determinative to the appeal.

The conditions set out in the accompanying schedule are based on those suggested by the Council in their appeal statement should the appeal be allowed. [name] agree the conditions are necessary, I have amended the wording, in the interests of precision and clarity, and to comply with advice in the Planning 4 Strategic Appropriate Assessment of Developments in [name] in the [name] dated March 2026 Practice Guidance (PPG). In addition to the standard condition relating to the commencement of development, it is necessary to specify the approved plans to provide certainty.

In the interests of biodiversity, a separate condition is necessary to secure the implementation of the mitigation and enhancement measures set out in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Assessment. As set out in the PPG, the statutory framework for biodiversity net gain requires a Biodiversity Gain Plan to be submitted and approved to discharge the mandatory biodiversity gain condition prior to the commencement of development. A condition to require compliance with the submitted details in that regard is therefore not necessary. Conditions to agree details of external materials to be used, along with details of hard and soft landscaping are necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the area, and to safeguard the living conditions of the occupiers of [address].

To ensure nutrient neutrality so as to protect the SAC, conditions are necessary to restrict future water usage and to secure the installation and ongoing maintenance of the package treatment plant. A condition to agree details of any external lighting, prior to its installation, is necessary to minimise light spillage in the interests of the character and appearance of the area and biodiversity. The condition suggested by the Council includes detailed information requirements. However, I have omitted these so that the parties can agree the precise requirements based upon relevant guidance and site circumstances at the time that the details are agreed.

In the interests of highway safety, a condition is necessary to require the provision and retention of parking spaces to serve the development. A condition is also necessary to agree details of the air source heat pump, to safeguard the living conditions of the occupiers of the neighbouring property. I have also imposed a condition to require the first-floor side window to the west elevation, which serves an en-suite, to be obscure glazed, to prevent any overlooking of the adjoining property.

A condition to secure appropriate mitigation in relation to the SAC is not necessary as this is covered by the appellant’s UU.

A condition is put to me by the Council which would restrict permitted development rights for extensions or alterations to the roof slopes of the approved dwellinghouse and the insertion of first floor windows or rooflights, in the interests of the amenity of the area and the NL. The PPG is clear that blanket removal of freedoms to carry out small scale domestic and non-domestic alterations that would otherwise not require an application for planning permission are unlikely to meet the tests of reasonableness and necessity. While there are specific exceptions for some classes where permitted development rights do not apply, the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 does not withdraw all permitted development rights for land within a NL but rather requires planning permission to be sought for specific development. It can therefore be surmised that the development within a NL for which permitted development rights remain intact is regarded by the Government as being no different in terms of the application of permitted development rights to land outside of it. I have not been presented with compelling reasons why permitted development rights should be withdrawn in this case, as such I have not imposed the condition.

For the above reasons the proposal would accord with the development plan, when read as a whole. Material considerations do not indicate a decision should be taken other than in accordance with the development plan. I therefore conclude the appeal should be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Dwg. No. 2323-3 - Site Location Plan, [name]: 2323-4a - Proposed Block Plan, [name]: [address] Scene Plan, [name]: 2323-12b [name] (North), [name]: 2323-13b [name] (South), [name]: 2323-14b [name], [name]: 2323-15b [name], [name]: 2323-10b Ground Floor Plan, [name]: 2323-11b First Floor Plan, [name]: 2323-1a [name] and [name]: 2323-16 [name] and Floor Plan.

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations and precautionary mitigation measures set out in the [name], [name]. undertaken by [name] & Associates, dated March 2024 and the measures therein retained as such in perpetuity.

No development above ground level shall take place until details of the materials to be used in the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted, including rainwater goods, windows and doors and solar panels, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained as such thereafter.

The dwellinghouse hereby approved shall be designed to ensure it does not exceed 120 litres per person per day water consumption levels (which includes external water usage) and shall not be first occupied until a water efficiency assessment has been undertaken to confirm compliance with the Building Regulations Optional requirement of a maximum water use.

The proposed package treatment plant and drainage field shall be installed, maintained and operated in accordance with the submitted specification and details hereby approved. Any subsequent replacements shall have an equivalent or improved performance specification. The package treatment plant and drainage field shall be installed, connected and available for use before the development is occupied and shall be maintained and operated thereafter for the lifetime of the development.

Prior to the installation of external lighting, full details including height, design, location, intensity and shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting installation shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the vehicle parking spaces have been provided in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans. Thereafter those spaces shall be retained for the parking of vehicles only.

Notwithstanding the submitted information, the development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a plan showing the location and specifications of the proposed Air Source Heat Pump has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter.

No development shall commence until a scheme of hard and soft landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the details of which shall include: (i) location and current canopy spread of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land; (ii) full details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development; (iii) a detailed planting specification showing all plant species, supply and planting sizes and planting densities; (iv) means of enclosure to include details of fencing and gates; (v) all hard and soft surfacing materials; and (vi) minor artefacts and structures to include refuse storage units.

All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the dwelling or the completion of the development whichever is the sooner; and any trees, hedgerow or plants which, within a period of five years, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species. All hard landscaping shall also be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the window at first floor level to the west (side) elevation has been fitted with obscured glazing, and no part of that window that is less than 1.7 metres above the floor of the room in which it is installed shall be capable of being opened. Details of the type of obscured glazing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the window is installed and once installed the obscured glazing shall be retained thereafter. ******end of conditions******