Appeal 6005879

The appeal is allowed and planning permission granted for external alterations and extension to existing dwelling at [site address] , [site address] , Ipstones, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application SMD/2025/0180 subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

The proposal includes a replacement front porch, a brick side extension and an oak framed glazed extension, all of which would be single storey. The external alterations would involve a bay window, reinstating two timber sash windows in bricked up openings, timber gates and a dwarf front wall with fencing above.

The Council does not dispute the porch, side extension or external alterations and from my site visit I consider those elements would assimilate into an acceptable standard within the surrounding area. The reason for refusal relates only to the oak framed glazed extension. Therefore, the subject of this appeal is the proposed oak framed extension.

The appeal site is within Ipstones Conservation Area (CA) wherein I have a statutory duty under Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act) to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area.

The appeal site is also close to a [name] listed building, described in the list entry as ‘House approximately 20 metres north of village school’ (hereafter referred to as LB). Section 66(1) of the Act requires the decision maker, in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

Additionally, the appeal property is recognised in the Ipstones Conservation Area Appraisal (2007) (CAA) as an ‘Other Significant Building’ and the stone boundary wall identified as a ‘[name]; together they are therefore a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA).

The main issue is the effect of the proposed oak framed extension on the character and appearance of the area having particular regard to the significance of the following heritage assets: the appeal property (NDHA), the CA and the LB.

The CA has a medieval origin and layout, showing the settlement’s development from a farming village through periods of growth and industrialisation during the 18th and 19th centuries. Many of the buildings from these later periods are retained, creating an overriding impression of vernacular construction with buildings typically erected in stone or brick with tiled roofs. Buildings in the centre are tightly knit, often situated immediately along the highway.

The LB is a late-18th century house with a mid-19th century alterations. The building is constructed in squared stone and tiled roof, with a symmetrical façade featuring mullioned windows, a central doorway and gablet. It possesses architectural and historic significance, owing to its retention of historic fabric and plan form, illustrative vernacular construction, and prominence in the streetscene. Its appearance reinforces the qualities important to the CA and its setting contributes to its significance, as the tight knit group of buildings display complementary architecture, and its configuration reveals its close relationship with the school.

Situated amongst a cluster of other NDHAs, the appeal site is set within a discrete plot surrounded by public roads on three sides and a narrow, publicly accessible alley on the fourth side. This layout formation was most likely established by the historical changes arising from industrial growth and increased housing need, when common land was encroached upon and housing divided to provide additional accommodation. Therefore, the boundary walls are important in reflecting the site’s transition through social history. The appearance of the appeal property depicts the prevailing local vernacular and traditional character with some modest architectural detailing. Its character is predominantly Victorian with parts of the building having much earlier origins. Its character, appearance and layout reinforce the positive elements of the CA and its location at the heart of the historic core of the village reflects its past role as a focal point in community life.

The oak framed extension would be modest in size with a flat, living roof (referred to in the evidence as a ‘green roof’). It would enclose the alcove between the main dwelling and the proposed side extension, which has been designed to emulate a brick store that formerly stood on site. When viewed against this backdrop, the scale of the oak framed extension would appear subservient to the principal elevation and the dwelling as a whole.

The extension would noticeably be a modern addition to the appeal property, but it proposes to use quality materials and would be easily distinguishable from the important vernacular elements, such as the boundary wall and front of the building. As these features would remain intact, the predominant historic and architectural interest would be preserved. Overall, I find the proposed oak framed extension would be a sympathetic addition to the appeal site that would authentically reflect the next chapter of the building.

Furthermore, it would not detract from the positive contribution of the building to the CA nor detract from its former community use. It would be visible, primarily when viewed from the front of the appeal property with slight views of the roof visible from the side adjacent to the LB. However, visibility in itself does not necessarily mean it would be harmful. I find its appearance would be consistent with the evolution of the CA, a pattern that is highlighted in the CAA.

The Staffordshire Moorlands Design Guide SPD (2018) provides scope within paragraph 5.6 for contemporary approaches to extensions to domestic buildings, provided they respond to the scale and character of the host dwelling. I find that the proposal follows this guidance.

Having given due consideration to the significance of the NDHA, as required by paragraph 216 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), I find that the proposed extension would have a neutral impact upon the character and appearance of the NDHA and, therefore, no harm would result. It follows that, for similar reasons, the positive contribution of the NDHA to the CA would not be impaired.

Moreover, although it would be seen in views with the LB, it would not be harmful and it would not detract from the architectural or historic character of that building. Whilst the LB is near to the appeal site, it is orientated in a different direction and there would be little intervisibility between it and the oak framed extension. This is due to the modest scale of the extension and the stone wall that encloses the boundaries of the site. Further visual separation is provided by the evergreen and deciduous landscaping within the plots of both buildings. I do not consider the location, scale or design of the oak framed extension would have a significant effect on the setting of the LB or to result in a harmful impact. The effect on setting is, therefore, neutral and would not undermine the significance of the LB.

[name] find that no harm would result to these heritage assets, the proposal would align with the expectations of the Act. In these circumstances, the balancing exercise set in paragraph 215 of the Framework is not engaged.

For the above reasons, I conclude that the proposed oak framed extension would not erode, weaken or otherwise detrimentally impact upon the significance of the NDHA, the CA or the setting of the LB. Accordingly, it would comply with Policies SS1, DC1 and DC2 of the Staffordshire Moorlands Local Plan (2020), which, amongst other things, support development that will make a positive contribution to their surroundings and enhance heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance.

Conditions relating to the commencement of development and specifying the approved plans are imposed in the interests of certainty.

The appellant has provided details of the materials proposed for the brick side extension, oak framed glazed extension and paint colour for the porch. I find these details acceptable. However, the ‘Materiality’ sheet which contains the information lacks a drawing or revision number and is undated, rendering it insufficiently precise to inform a planning condition specifying the use of these materials. Therefore, I have included a condition requiring the resubmission of these details to ensure enforceability.

No details have been provided confirming the materials or colour intended for the windows, fencing, timber gates or raingarden water butt container. The above-referenced condition will secure details of these also.

A separate condition is attached to secure architectural details of the windows and glazing, such as depth of reveals and frames.

Such conditions are necessary to ensure appropriate design and use of materials, to preserve or enhance the character of the appeal property and comply with the

For the reasons given above, the proposed development accords with the development plan as a whole and there are no other considerations that indicate I should take a decision other than in accordance with it. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos: • Location Plan • AL09 [name] • AL10 [name] • AL11 [name] • AL12 [name] • AL13 [name] • AL17 [name]

No development above ground level shall take place until the following details have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: a) Materials for the brickwork, roof tiles, oak framed extension and porch b) Colour and material of fencing above front boundary wall c) Colour of the timber gates d) Colour of the bay window and sash windows e) Colour and material of the raingarden water butt container The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained.

No development above ground level shall take place until details of the design of the bay window, sash windows and oak framed extension including drawings at scale 1:20 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 retained in perpetuity. End of Schedule