Replacement windows

Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 14 April 2021 by R Morgan BSc (Hons) MCD MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 10 May 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/H4315/D/21/3267288 24 Park Road North, NEWTON-LE-WILLOWS, WA12 9TE • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr David Roberts against the decision of St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council. • The application Ref P/2020/0756/HHFP, dated 13 October 2020, was refused by notice dated 11 December 2020. • The development proposed is replacement windows. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for replacement windows at 24 Park Road North, NEWTON-LE-WILLOWS, WA12 9TE in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref P/2020/0756/HHFP, dated 13 October 2020, and the plans submitted with it. Procedural Matter 2. The windows have already been installed and therefore I am considering this appeal retrospectively. Main Issue 3. The main issue is whether the proposal would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the High Street Conservation Area. Reasons 4. The appeal property is located on the corner of Park Road North and Birley Street, within the High Street Conservation Area (CA). This section of Park Road North is characterised by red brick and slate nineteenth century houses, set behind front gardens with low boundary walls. Whilst there is some variety of property types, there is an overall consistency of architectural treatment and features, with a strong vertical rhythm to windows, and decorative brickwork around their frames. 5. Number 24 Park Road North is an attractive three storey Victorian town house which forms the end property in a terrace of four houses. The front elevation is of significance to the local street scene as it is viewed within the context of the other primary decorative elevations of these period terraces and semi-detached properties. 6. The original windows in the houses in this part of the CA were typically painted timber sliding sashes, but in many cases, including the appeal property, these have since been replaced. Houses in the surrounding area now display a Appeal Decision APP/H4315/D/21/3267288 2 mixture of original and replacement timber and uPVC windows in a variety of styles. The appellant has stated that the previous windows at the appeal property, which dated from the 1990s, were not sliding sashes, and that despite attempts to maintain them over the years, the softwood frames had deteriorated. 7. The replacement front windows do not reflect the original materials, but they are an improvement on the pre-existing windows in that they re-introduce the appearance of the original style of window, and provide symmetry with those of the adjacent property. When viewed in the street scene as a whole, they support its characteristic appearance and do not appear discordant. 8. The less decorated side elevation of the appeal property faces onto Birley St, which comprises a great variety of built form and contributes less to the character of the wider CA. This elevation is dominated by the expanse of brickwork. Whilst the replacement windows are of standard appearance, they do not appear particularly intrusive or out of place as part of the utilitarian appearance of this elevation. 9. I note the conservation advisor’s concerns that the use of uPVC causes slight harm to the integrity and authenticity of the building, and hence to the character of the CA. However, the previous windows, although timber, did not retain the original features of the building, and the use of uPVC has previously been accepted at the adjoining property, so the authenticity of the building had already been eroded. 10. Taking account of the style and appearance of the replacement windows, and having regard to the pre-existing situation and the use of modern materials at the neighbouring property, I am satisfied that the proposal preserves the character and appearance of the CA. As such, the proposal is consistent with Policy CQL4 of the St Helens Core Strategy, which requires that new development respects the significance and distinctive quality of the built and historic environment. The proposal also complies with Saved Policy ENV 24B of the Unitary Development Plan, which requires that new or replacement development preserves or enhances the special character of Conservation Areas. 11. I have found no conflict with section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework, including the requirement in paragraph 193 that, when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. Conclusion 12. For the reasons given, the appeal is allowed. R Morgan INSPECTOR