Appeal 6005772

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a proposed first-floor extension above the existing detached garage to form additional space comprising a gym and WC. External alterations include the addition of a window within the new raised gable to the front elevation and a new window to the rear at [site address] , Ampthill, [site address] [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/03566/FULL, dated 17/12/2025, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing Nos. BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10010-P01 Site Location Plan, BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10011-P01 Existing Block Plan, BH25011-BMA- 00-00-DR-A-10012-P01 Proposed Block Plan, BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A- 10100-P01 [name], BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10101-P01 [name], BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10102-P02 [name], BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10103-P02 Proposed Roof Plan, BH25011- BMA-00-00-DR-A-10200-P04 Existing and [name], BH25011- BMA-00-00-DR-A-10300-P04 Existing and [name], BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10301-P04 Existing and [name], BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10302-P04 Existing and [name], BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10303-P04 Existing and [name] and BH25011-BMA-00-00-DR-A-10304-P04 Proposed 3D Iso.

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The external materials of the extension hereby permitted shall match those used in the host dwelling as set out on drawing No BH25011-BMA-00-00-[name]-10300-P04.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the surrounding area, including Ampthill Conservation Area.

The appeal site is located within the Ampthill Conservation Area. Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (LBCA) requires special attention be paid to preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas. In addition, the National Planning Policy Framework requires great weight be given to the conservation of heritage assets.

The Conservation Area encompasses a substantial part of the town of Ampthill and centres around the [address] where [address], [address], [address] and [address] converge. The setting of the Conservation Area is primarily defined by the ‘parkland’ character which is most notable from [address] and [address]. The Conservation Area has a high quality townscape due to the concentration of many attractive historic buildings. There is generally a very limited palette of materials consisting of red brick and clay tiles. The character of the Conservation Area could be described as having a number of constituent parts ranging from the commercial part of the town, Ampthill Park and the Victorian/Edwardian properties located on routes into the town. Given the above, I find that the significance of the Conservation Area, insofar as it relates to this appeal, to be primarily associated with attractive historic properties located on routes into the town.

The appeal site is located within the heart of the Conservation Area on a street that includes a mix of uses and property types and is adjacent to [name], which whilst not listed is defined as a building of local importance within the Conservation Area Appraisal (2005). The appeal property forms one half of a pair of substantial semi-detached properties. This pair of three storey Victorian town houses are relatively uniform in appearance, constructed in red brick with two storey projecting bays which, through their architectural merit, make a positive contribution to the Conservation Area’s character.

The appeal scheme relates to a single storey, detached garage which is set back from the rear elevation of the host property’s main volume. It proposes a first floor extension above the existing garage with a modest extension at the rear and demolition of a small lean-to. Whilst the pitch of the front facing gable would differ from the narrow pitch of the host dwelling, it would maintain the roof form of the existing garage and thus would be in keeping with the site’s existing character.

The extended garage would be constructed in red brick to match the main dwelling and the appellant intends to reuse the existing roof tiles where possible. White-painted timber fascias and sash windows would also be utilised. This reflects the detailing of the host property and therefore would complement the main dwelling.

By virtue of both the increased footprint and height the proposal would notably increase the garage building’s scale and massing. However, the garage building would be substantially lesser in height and scale than the host dwelling, extending only to its first floor windows. Furthermore, the set back position of the garage would also ensure it does not visually compete with the main dwelling. Therefore, viewed within the context of the host dwelling, a large three storey townhouse, the garage would not appear overly dominant and would remain subservient in form and appearance.

Furthermore, due to its siting, public views of the extended garage would be limited to a small area on [address] directly in front of the appeal site and consequently the development could not be considered prominent. This accords section 11.29 of the [site address] [name] which indicates garages should respect the scale, character, and materials of the property.

There are notable existing differences between the appeal site and adjoining plot. The garage at No 86 is sited further from [address] and views of it are partially blocked by another outbuilding. No 86’s garage also has a different colour door and a greater proportion of the front elevation is clad in black wooden panels. Furthermore, given the width of the properties and the extent to which the garages are set back there is no position on [address] where the garages can be viewed simultaneously. I am therefore satisfied that the proposed development would not unbalance the pair of semi-detached dwellings and no harm would arise from a lack of uniformity between the garages.

Concerns have been raised over the impact of the proposals on the adjacent [name]. There is already a closeknit relationship between the church and garage. Whilst the extended garage would be slightly closer to the Church, the important and most prominent views of the original Church from [address] or [address] would be unaltered. I am therefore satisfied that the proposal does not impact on the setting of the Church.

By virtue of its positioning towards the rear of the site and complementary design with sympathetic materials the proposed garage would not detract from the appearance of the host dwelling. Consequently, the plot would continue to contribute positively to the Conservation Area’s character.

Given its siting, choice of matching materials and subservient appearance the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. It would therefore meet the requirements of the LBCA and accord with Policies HQ1 and HE3 of the [site address] Local Plan. Amongst other matters, these policies ensures that new developments achieve the highest possible quality and respond positively to their context and where possible preserve, sustain and enhance the special character and significance of heritage assets.

Concerns have been raised that the proposal would result in a loss of light to the [name]. However, I am satisfied that the large east facing window would not be obstructed by the extension. The proposal will therefore not result in a loss of light to the community room.

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. Given the architectural quality of the surrounding buildings the use of matching materials is required to ensure that the character and appearance of the area is maintained.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the proposal would be in accordance with the development plan as a whole and there are no material considerations that indicate that the development should be determined otherwise than in accordance with it. Therefore, the appeal is allowed.