Appeal 6004173

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of 1no. chalet bungalow with associated private amenity areas and parking, following the demolition of existing garage at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/TH/25/0752, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

The main issues are the effect of the proposed development on: • the character and appearance of the area; and • the living conditions of the occupiers of Farina, with particular reference to outlook.

The appeal site is residential garden land alongside, and associated with, [site address] (No 130). It is accessed by way of a private road that serves three properties; No 130; Farina, a bungalow immediately south of the site, and [address] (No 132).

The Birchington village-wide [name] document (the BDG) identifies distinct local [name]. The appeal site is within the largest of these, Area 4: General Neighbourhood. The BDG defines the pattern of development therein as including a variety of typologies including bungalows, detached, and semi-detached houses, with a variety of roof designs, the most common being open gables, hips, or dormer roofs.

My visit to the area provided no reason to disagree with the BDG. Indeed, I found it to include such a mix of traditional, residential building types that one of the chief characteristics of the local built environment is the notable absence of architectural uniformity. I also noted that bungalows are common, including on [address] near the access to the appeal site. Many of these present gable ends to the road.

The enclave immediately around the appeal site is typical of the Character Area, in that No 130, Farina, and No 132 share little in terms of footprint dimensions, roof shapes, detailing, or finishes. That said, all three are bungalows set on the western side of the access road, where they combine with [address] (No 116) to form a broadly consistent pocket of linear development on a north-south axis. Similar ridge and eaves heights further tie the bungalows together visually.

The proposal is to erect a chalet-style bungalow. That is a form of development common in the local area and definitive of the enclave. As such, the proposal would adhere to the fundamental character of both. The proposed dwelling would not replicate the specific appearance of any existing nearby property, but there is such an architectural mix within the area and the enclave that no conflict with local character would arise; Indeed, in displaying a small degree of individuality within a broadly traditional form, the proposal would be typical of the area.

The eaves and ridge height of the proposed dwelling would align broadly with those of the other bungalows alongside it, and it would maintain the existing pattern of development along the western side of the private road. Given the above, I am content that it would respect the defining characteristics of the enclave sufficiently to appear a natural addition to it.

The presence of rooflights in the proposed dwelling would, to some degree, identify it as comprising two-storey accommodation, but I see no harm in this as it is not uncommon locally; No 116 and No 132 have roof dormers, indicating two-storey bungalow accommodation. The same is true of bungalows on the western side of [address], which are visible from the appeal site.

The largely open nature of the appeal site gives the enclave a degree of spaciousness, which the appeal proposal would reduce. However, the site is not wholly undeveloped at present; the existing garage is positioned close to the road and parallel to it, such that roadside built form is reasonably continuous and there is little sense from the road of any clear separation between No 130 and Farina. The proposal would open up the area alongside the road by removing the garage and setting the bungalow back behind the line of No 130 and Farina. Overall, I do not consider the reduction in spaciousness to be harmful.

The proposed dwelling would be some 5.8m at least from Farina, and 3.6m from the main element of No 130. These are not unusually short separation distances in a typical suburban setting, and I see no evidence that the local area is characterised by gaps between dwellings that are notably wider than that. The roof ridgeline of the dwelling would run east to west, as is the case at No 130 and Farina. This would open up the space between the dwellings in the enclave at roof level, further ensuring a reasonable sense of openness and separation.

The proposed development would not have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area; and I see no conflict in that respect with Policy QD02 of the Thanet Local Plan (2020) (the Local Plan), or Policy B1 of the Birchington Neighbourhood Plan (2023).

Farina has windows running along its northern elevation (the windows). These serve, from the front of the property running rearwards, a kitchen, a study, and a bathroom respectively.

The introduction of the proposed dwelling would significantly alter the outlook from the windows both individually and overall, by introducing built form where it does not currently exist. The pertinent requirement of Policy QD03 of the Local Plan, however, is that new development should not lead to unacceptable living conditions through a sense of enclosure, rather than that it should not change existing outlook, including levels of openness therein.

The proposed dwelling would be set back from the front elevation of Farina to such an extent that it would not impinge in any significant way on views from the kitchen window. Indeed, the removal of the existing garage at the appeal site would go some way to opening up those views.

The bathroom windows would face out onto the mid part of the proposed dwelling, but do not serve a habitable room in the sense of being one in which occupiers are likely to spend time enjoying the outlook.

The study windows would also face onto the mid part of the proposed dwelling. The appellant has not disputed that the study could be used as a bedroom. Even if it could not, it seems to me to be a room where occupiers of Farina would spend time, and to which outlook is therefore no less important. Given the circumstances I have described above, the effect of the development on the study would likely be the one most keenly felt.

The study window looks out onto the existing boundary fence in the foreground, and then beyond it to the flank of No 130. I found that housing on the main part of [address] was visible in glimpses from the boundary. The key components of the view, therefore, are residential development, some treetops, and the sky. Overall, the view is unremarkable, and I see no reason to find it particularly sensitive to change.

The proposal would introduce visual elements of a type already found in northward views from Farina, and none which would be incongruous in the setting. Indeed, I see little in the traditional form and materials of the proposed dwelling to suggest that it would be an unusual or unpleasant building to look at.

The Council is content that the proposal would not have a harmful effect on levels of natural light in Farina. Given the height of the proposed dwelling and the orientation of the two buildings, I see no reason to find otherwise. Taking the factors listed above together, I see little reason to find that the proposal would dominate views from the study or exert a significant influence on the experience of being in that room.

The proposed dwelling would be some 6m away from the study window, which is a reasonable distance given its modest height. The effect of its presence would be further mitigated by the pitch of its roof, which would rise away from the study. The use of flying hips at either end of the roof would also assist in limiting visual bulk. I find it would be a small enough building and far enough away from the study window that the creation of unacceptable living conditions through a sense of enclosure would be avoided.

The proposed development would not have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of Farina, with particular reference to outlook, and see no conflict in that regard with Policy QD03 of the Local Plan.

The appeal site is within the zone of influence for the [name] and Sandwich Bay Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar. The qualifying features are the presence of European golden plover (Non-breeding), Ruddy turnstone (Non-breeding), and Little tern (Breeding). The submitted evidence indicates that the appeal scheme would have a likely significant effect on the SPA/Ramsar sites, as recreational disturbance is a potential cause of the decline in bird numbers.

Mitigation for the proposed residential unit would be required in the form of a financial contribution, as per the tariff related to the [name] and Monitoring Plan (SAMMP). This has been supplied already by the appellant.

I am content that the sum is appropriate in accordance with the SAMMP, and that with the proposed mitigation measures in place the development would not have an adverse effect on the SPA and Ramsar. The development would therefore comply with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). It would also accord with Policy SP29 of the Local Plan which requires proposals for new residential development to comply with the (SAMMP) in order to mitigate against the in- combination effects of new development through the pathway of recreational pressure on the SPA and Ramsar site.

I acknowledge objections from third parties relating to matters other than those addressed above. The Council does not consider any of those matters to lead to reasons for refusal of the proposed development. Having considered the Council’s reasoning as set out in its appeal submissions, and the effect of conditions as described below, I have found no reason to see those matters differently.

The conditions set out in the accompanying schedule are based on those suggested by the Council. These conditions have been considered against the tests of the National Planning Policy Framework and advice provided by the Planning Practice Guidance on conditions.

In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out following the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of certainty. Conditions requiring agreement over external materials and landscaping are required in the interest of the visual amenity of the area.

A condition ensuring that south-facing glazing is obscured is required to protect neighbouring amenity. A condition requiring parking areas to be kept available for the parking of vehicles is required to ensure highway safety. A condition requiring the refuse and cycle storage facilities shown on the plans to be provided and retained is required to ensure the development benefits from those essential facilities.

A condition requiring biodiversity enhancement is reasonable in pursuance of Part 3 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. A requirement that water efficiency standards be met is reasonable as the site is within a water stress area. Control over external lighting is required to protect biodiversity. Agreement over a construction management plan is necessary to ensure the protection of nearby trees, of neighbouring amenity, and the upkeep of highway safety throughout the construction phase of the development.

For the reasons given above the appeal is allowed.

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

The proposed development shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted drawings numbered: 12 [name]; 13 [name]; 14 [name]; 15 [name]; and 17.

No development shall take place until details of the means of foul and surface water disposal, including details of the implementation, management and maintenance of any proposed [name], have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with such details as are agreed and thereafter maintained.

Prior to the erection of the external faces of the dwelling hereby approved, details and manufacturer's specification of the external materials 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.

The windows, door and rooflight in the southern side elevation and ground floor window on the northern side elevation of the development hereby approved shall be provided and maintained with obscured glass to a minimum level of obscurity to conform to [name] level 4 or equivalent and shall be installed prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted and permanently retained thereafter.

The area shown on the approved plan numbered 12 [name] for vehicle parking shall be kept available for such use at all times and such land and access thereto shall be provided prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted.

The refuse and cycle storage facilities as specified upon the approved drawing numbered 12 [name] shall be provided prior to the first occupation of the dwelling hereby approved and shall be kept available for that use at all times.

Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved, a Biodiversity Enhancement Plan (BEP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include details of the following: o A full planting schedule utilising primarily native species; o Full elevations plans detailing the model and location of 2 x integral swift boxes in accordance with BS 42021:2022 (north/east facing, 4m from the ground and with unobstructed access); o Details of at least 1 x externally-mounted or integral bat box which is to be of durable construction and suitably located; o Locations of 13×13cm holes in close board fencing provided for hedgehogs; The approved plan shall be implemented as described and retained thereafter.

Prior to the first occupation of the development hereby approved, full details of both hard and soft landscape works, to include species, size and location of new trees, shrubs, hedges and grassed areas to be planted the treatment proposed for all hard surfaced areas beyond the limits of the highway walls, fences, other means of enclosure proposed shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority.

All hard and soft landscape works, including biological enhancement features, shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the first occupation/use of any part of the development, or in accordance with a programme of works to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of the landscape and enhancement works, photographic evidence of implementation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in order to verify the works have been completed in accordance with the approved plans, and to enable the full discharge of this condition. Any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development 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 as those originally planted, unless written approval to any variation is provided by the Local Planning Authority. All ecological enhancement features shall thereafter be maintained.

The development hereby permitted shall be constructed in order to meet the required technical standard for water efficiency of 110litres/person/day, thereby Part G2 Part 36 (2b) of Schedule 1 Regulation 36 to the Building Regulations 2010, as amended, applies.

Prior to the installation of any external lighting at the site, full details of any external lighting shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations approved.

Prior to the commencement of works hereby permitted (including demolition and site clearance), a Construction and Arboricultural Management Plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The management plan shall include the following: o Details of the tree protection measures during construction for the retained tree as identified on plan numbered 12 [name] (to accord with BS 5837 2012); o A scheme for auditing tree protection during construction and subsequent reporting of this to the Local Planning Authority; o Parking and turning areas for construction and delivery vehicles and site personnel; o Timing of deliveries; o Provision of wheel washing facilities; o Measures to control noise affecting nearby residents; o Dust control measures; o Access arrangements. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved management plan. Schedule ends