None

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 18 September 2025 by B Plenty BSc (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 06 October 2025 Section 78 Appeal Ref: APP/D0840/D/25/3364326 Development: proposed single storey porch extension and Photovoltaic array at 6 Vogue Hill, St. Day, Redruth, Cornwall TR16 5NQ Application Ref is PA25/00453. Decision – dismissed 1. I have adjusted the description of development to remove elements that do not describe development. The scheme has already been constructed in accordance with the plans that were submitted and refused by the Council. Reasons Issue - the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the dwelling and surrounding area 2. The appeal site is part of a terraced row of housing on a hill. Other than modest sized porches, the row has a strong linear front building line. Features within the street include tall, narrow windows, prominent chimney stacks and stepped rooflines. Porches are a variety of styles and sizes but are all substantially smaller than that proposed. Other porches are mostly narrow with a pitched roof, some are wider with flat roofs, but maintain a glass and lightweight appearance. Consequently, the proposed extension would be disproportionate and discordant to the appearance of neighbouring porches, being of substantial width, with limited glass and having a solid form. Accordingly, the extension represents an obtrusive addition that results in harm to the appearance of the dwelling and the wider streetscene. 3. The dwelling and nearby development within the street have been subject to replacement windows and porches that have, to some extent, degraded the appearance of the street. However, these alterations are relatively minor and do not materially erode the value or contribution made by built form to the appearance of the street. The proposed solar arrays obscure large areas of the roof but are relatively discrete and others were noted on a limited number of nearby dwellings. However, taken in combination with the extension the proposed arrays exacerbate the identified harm of the extension to the site and its surroundings. 4. The dwelling features in historic maps (1875-1901) and is a strong example of a typical mineworker’s dwelling. As such, the dwelling contributes to St Day’s industrial past and the mining expansion throughout the 19th Century. For these Appeal Decision APP/D0840/D/25/3364326 2 reasons it makes a positive contribution to the Gwennap Mining District World Heritage Site (WHS), as such the dwelling is regarded as a non-designated heritage asset. 5. The National Planning Policy Framework identifies the WHS are heritage assets of the highest significance, which are internationally recognised as being of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV). As I have found that the proposal has a harmful effect on the dwelling and streetscene, it would harm the OUV of the WHS. The effect on the WHS would result in less than substantial harm where the Framework requires such harm to be balanced against the public benefits of the scheme. 6. I am cognisant of the support conveyed by St Day Parish Council and several local residents. Furthermore, the proposal would meet policy C1 of the Climate Emergency DPD, to minimise greenhouse gas emissions and renewable benefits of the Framework. However, such support in the community, and the renewable energy benefits of the proposal (which can only be attributed to part of the proposal), are public benefits of limited to modest weight that do not outweigh the identified harm. Furthermore, the appellant has not demonstrated that the proposal is necessary to create a viable use to sustain the asset and garner support through paragraph 210 of the Framework. 7. Therefore, taking the above points together, the proposal would unacceptably harm the character and appearance of the dwelling and local area and be contrary to the policies cited in the decision notice. The scheme would be contrary to the development plan as a whole and nothing outweighs this. B Plenty INSPECTOR