Appeal 6004576

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for demolition of single storey elements and outbuildings, erection of two storey and single storey extensions with erection of detached garage at Westerkirk, [site address] , Staplegrove, Taunton [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 38/25/0336, without complying with conditions 1 to 13 attached to planning permission Ref 38/24/0371, dated 12/02/2025, but instead subject to the conditions at the Schedule at the end of this decision.

Planning permission was granted in 2025 to alter and extend the dwelling at Westerkirk, and to erect a detached garage. The appellant now seeks to vary conditions 2 (approved plans), 4 (bat mitigation) and 12 (tree protection) of that permission, in particular to make elevational changes to the approved proposal. These would involve the addition of full-height glazing to part of the new extension, and the removal of hanging tiles and some of the render on the existing dwelling. It is also proposed to vary the bat and tree protection conditions to reflect subsequent approvals.

The main issues are: • the effect of the proposed changes on the character and appearance of the area, including the Staplegrove Conservation Area (CA), within which the site lies, and its effect on Kibby’s, its coach house and stables, which are [name] listed, and • whether conditions 4 and 12 should be amended in respect of trees and bats.

Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act) requires that I pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the CA. Section 66(1) of the same Act requires that I have special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed buildings and their settings, or any features of special architectural or historic interest.

The Staplegrove CA covers part of what was historically a rural village, and retains this feel despite the expansion of Taunton over time. The CA has a mix of architectural designs, including properties of Arts-and-Crafts, Victorian and vernacular types and detailing. Relevant to this appeal, the significance of the CA is the attractive, traditional and semi-rural appearance of its buildings and street scenes.

The dwelling at Westerkirk is adjacent to Kibby’s, including its associated coach house and stables. Kibby’s consists of a former farmhouse with 17th century origins. It has architectural interest because of its design, construction and craftsmanship as a farmhouse. Its detached stable block building is divided between Kibby’s and the appeal site. It also has architectural interest and aesthetic value as well as providing a surviving connection between Kibby’s and Westerkirk, with group value. Applicable to this appeal, the significance of the listed buildings is their age and setting as part of the semi-rural, historic core of Staplegrove.

The appeal dwelling is a large, detached house dating from the early 20th century. Its design has been influenced by the Arts-and-Crafts style, including having wide gables and tall chimneys. It was historically accessed from [address], but this is now taken from [site address] . The property has an attractive design and adds to the setting of the listed buildings. As such, it makes a positive contribution to the CA and constitutes a Non-Designated Heritage Asset.

As now proposed, one of the elevations of the [name] would have a fully glazed area extending to the apex of the gable roof, whereas the approved version has solid walling. I do not doubt that Arts-and-Crafts houses often feature gable windows, full-height bays and tall, A-shaped roofs, with an emphasis on light, space and air. Examples nationally include focal-point gables with generous glazing to help frame landscape views. [name] properties in Somerset undoubtedly have garden elevations with glazing to provide a ‘living front’. Even so, no specific local instances of a glazing pattern similar to the proposal have been identified.

In respect of the appeal site, a connection to the garden, as well as light to the [name], would already be provided by the approved bi-fold doors. This part of the building would not be particularly bulky and so its form does not provide a justification for the proposed glazing. Westerkirk has a tall full-height staircase window, but this retains solid wall to the roof and so does not appear unusual. In contrast, by extending the glazing as proposed, the affected elevation would appear overtly modern. As such, it would look out of place with the more traditional appearance of the rest of the house, including the approved extension.

It is also proposed to remove hanging tiles on the dwelling, and replace them with render. The tiles may well not be an original feature, and at the time of my visit had been temporarily taken off. Nevertheless, hanging tiles give something of a rural, cottage-like feel to the dwelling. Weathered tiles would be less intrusive than render in wider views, such as from a nearby footpath. The permanent removal of the hanging tiles would therefore detract from the appearance of the building.

The proposal includes the removal of render, primarily on what was historically the main elevation. This removal had also taken place at the time of my visit, and has revealed a stone wall, brick quoins, window details, and a crest. These details may have originally been intended to be exposed. Removal of the render may prolong the life of the masonry and avoid damp. I understand that urgent repairs to the walls are necessary, though works have commenced in any case.

Nonetheless, the removal of the render from some sections of the dwelling, and its introduction on others, would give the impression of this part of the building as forming separate elements. This would give the south western elevation a disjointed appearance, undermining the visual cohesion of the building as a whole. Accordingly, I conclude that this change would also have a negative effect on the design of the property.

Other elements of the works would be acceptable such as changes to the porch. The development would result in the conservation and enhancement of what is said to be a dilapidated building, damaged by vacancy, dampness and fire. It would also involve the removal of collapsed buildings and the replacement of columns at the entrance. However, these benefits would also flow from the previously approved scheme. As such, they do not provide a good reason to justify the harmful effects that I have identified above.

Consequently, the proposed changes would have negative effects on the attractive, traditional and semi-rural appearance of the building as an NDHA and on the CA as a whole. It would similarly detract from the setting and significance of Kibby’s and its associated [address] and Stables, as part of the semi-rural, historic core of Staplegrove. Having regard to the advice of the Planning Practice Guidance1 (PPG), I take this view despite the limited publicly obtainable views of parts of the property.

For the reasons given, the proposed amendments would harm the character and appearance of the area, including the NDHA, CA and adjacent listed buildings. On this basis, the proposal would conflict with policies CP8 and DM1 of the Taunton 1 Paragraph: 013, [name]: 18a-[phone] [name], adopted September 2012. These require development to conserve and enhance the historic environment, and to not unacceptably harm the character or appearance of a building.

For the same reasons, the proposal would not comply with the Act. In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), I give great weight to the harm to the designated heritage assets and their significance. In the language of the Framework, the proposal would result in less than substantial harm. That said, no additional public benefits beyond those considered above have been identified. The balances of Framework paragraphs 215 and 216 do not therefore indicate approval. It follows that I shall not change the approved plans relevant to this issue referred to in condition 2.

In addition to the changes to the building, the appellant also seeks to vary conditions 4 and 12. The amendment in respect of condition 4 seeks to remove the requirement to provide photographs of the bat boxes installed for temporary roosting. Condition 12 is proposed to be amended by omitting the need for submission of a scheme for the protection of trees. Instead, it would refer to the scheme that has already been approved by the Council.

The proposed changes would not undermine the extent of protection afforded to these matters. The Council does not object to the changes, and I see little reason to disagree. Conditions 4 and 12 can therefore be amended in respect of trees and bats, and to that limited extent the appeal is successful.

The site falls within the nutrient catchment area of the [name] and Moors Ramsar Site. However, the Council considers that nutrient neutrality would not be changed by the proposal, and I take the same view. As a result, it is not necessary for me to consider any likely significant effects on the integrity of the Ramsar Site, or to undertake an Appropriate Assessment as part of this appeal.

The PPG makes clear that decision notices for the granting of planning permission under section 73 should restate conditions previously imposed which continue to have effect. Even so, work has commenced on site. As such, some conditions originally imposed need to be amended. The Council has provided a list of revised conditions. I have assessed and amended these based on the advice of the PPG, and having sought comments from the Council and the appellant. For clarity, I have used the same condition numbers as those previously used.

As development has already begun, the permission should start from the date of my decision. I shall impose a condition confirming this. Condition 2, requiring adherence to the approved plans, is necessary for certainty. I have amended this condition only to the extent of the numbering of the topographical plans, to be consistent with the other plans.

The other conditions remain for the same reasons as originally proposed, albeit re-worded in accordance with the PPG and to reflect that work has commenced, including in respect of conditions 4 and 12. However, I have deleted conditions 6 and 7. This is because any effects on birds and reptiles relevant to these conditions will already have occurred now that work has started.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should succeed, but only in respect of the matters I refer to above. I will grant a new planning permission subject to the conditions in the Schedule below.

Notwithstanding the time limits given to implement planning permission as prescribed by Sections 91 and 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), this permission (being granted under section 73A of the Act in respect of development being carried out) shall have effect from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: (A4) DrNo 01 Location Plan, (A4) DrNo 02 Existing Block Plan, (A1) DrNo 03 Existing Site Survey, (A1) DrNo 04 Existing Ground Floor Plan, First Floor Plan & Elevations, (A3) DrNo 16 Existing Plan & Elevations, (A2) DrNo 17 Existing Plan & Elevations Veterinary Building, (A1) DrNo 18 [name] (A1) DrNo 30 [name] & First Floor Plan, (A1) DrNo 31 [name] SK09 (A3) DrNo 32 [name] & Elevations (A3) DrNo [address] Plan & Elevations (A1) DrNo 34 [name] SK09 (A4) DrNo 35 Proposed Block Plan SK09

Works to any of the buildings shall cease within one month of the date of this decision unless the Local Planning Authority has been provided with either (a) a copy of the licence issued by Natural England pursuant to Regulation 55 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 authorising the development to go ahead; or (b) a statement in writing from a licensed bat ecologist to the effect that he/she considers that the specified development does not require a licence. Works shall not recommence until these details have been provided.

(i) No internal works to the dwelling shall take place until an internal survey for bats within the loft spaces has taken place. Should a bat be present within any loft areas, a licensed bat ecologist shall capture the bat and move it to the bat box located on the coach house and mature trees. The bat licensed ecologist will supervise the 'soft' dismantling of the roof and any features such as ridge, soffits, lead flashing, felt, mortar and the wooden boards at the windows where appropriate. Soft dismantling will be undertaken by hand and hand tools only, each tile will be removed gently pulled away from the roof to avoid crushing, and careful ridge removal and a thorough check within the ridge line will be undertaken by hand. Other features shall be carefully and inspected for the presence of bats and/or bat evidence. Should any bats be present, the licensed bat worker shall relocate the bat to an existing bat box. Once the features suitable to support roosting bats have been dismantled then works can continue unsupervised. Should a bat be discovered at any other time then works shall cease and the licensed bat ecologist contacted for advice. Anyone who is not a licensed bat ecologist is strictly forbidden from handling bats. (ii) The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until: • The loft space has been segregated off from the main roof to support bats, and a sign erected on the boxed off loft space advertising the presence of a bat roost, • 10 bat access points have been installed and a breathable felt used. • Two ridge access points have been installed at the southeastern ridge to provide direct access into the roof void. • details of two post-monitoring surveys, and a written statement and/or photographs of the mitigation measures, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved bat boxes for temporary roosting shall be maintained in-situ thereafter.

No external lighting shall be installed within the site unless it is in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Deleted.

Deleted.

The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the following features have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the approved details have been installed: • Two bird boxes around the site boundaries or on buildings. • One bee brick. • One log pile on the southern boundary.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order), the use of the garage thereby permitted as part of this development shall not be used other than for parking and for no other use.

The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until space for the parking and turning of four vehicles within the site has been laid out, drained and surfaced, in accordance with details that shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and such area(s) shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking and turning of vehicles associated with the development.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order, with or without modifications, no vehicular access gates shall be erected at any time unless they are set back a minimum distance of 6 metres behind the highway boundary and hung so as to open inwards only.

Works to any of the buildings shall cease within one month of the date of this decision and shall not commence until protective tree fencing has been erected and the scheme for the protection of trees to be retained has been implemented, in accordance with the Tree Protection Details approved by the Local Planning Authority on 20th May 2025. The fencing and scheme shall be maintained and retained for the full duration of works. No construction activities shall take place within the protected areas.

The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until a scheme of landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land and those to be retained. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building. Any trees or plants which within a period of five 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 similar size and species. End of Conditions