New single-storey porch on front elevation of an existing cottage in a Conservation Area

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 25 January 2023 by S Brook BA (Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 7 February 2023 Appeal Ref: APP/N2739/D/22/3311273 Northfield, Main Street, Appleton Roebuck, North Yorkshire YO23 7DN • 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 Mrs Gillian Wiles against the decision of Selby District Council. • The application Ref 2022/0772/HPA, dated 25 June 2022, was refused by notice dated 26 August 2022. • The development proposed is described as ‘New single-storey porch on front elevation of an existing cottage in a Conservation Area’. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a new single- storey porch on front elevation of an existing cottage in a Conservation Area at Northfield, Main Street, Appleton Roebuck, North Yorkshire YO23 7DN in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 2022/0772/HPA, dated 25 June 2022, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with approved plans: 0266_004b 01, 0266_004b 02, 0266_004b 04, 0266_004b 06, 0266_004b 08, 0266_004b 09, 0266_004b 11, 0266_004b 13, 0266_004b 15, 0266_004b 16, 0266_004b 19, 0266_004b 20. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building. Main Issue 2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the building itself and the area, which includes the Appleton Roebuck Conservation Area (CA). Reasons 3. The proposed development relates to a detached, double fronted cottage, two storeys in height. The cottage has a traditional appearance, simple in overall style and detailing, and is of a modest scale. Traditional materials of red brick and pantiles are retained along with timber multi-pane sash windows with a vertical emphasis, positioned either side of a central door with fanlight, Appeal Decision APP/N2739/D/22/3311273 2 providing a symmetry to the main elevation. The dwelling is set back from the main road through the village by a landscaped garden, with low brick wall. 4. Appleton Roebuck is a linear village, comprised of a range of buildings, predominantly dwellings, that vary in both age and style. There are examples of larger villas set in more substantial plots, as well as more modest traditional cottages, both detached and terraced. The Appleton Roebuck and Acaster Selby Neighbourhood Development Plan (NP) indicates that Georgian and Victorian dwellings reflect the wealth and status of the residents of that time, demonstrating the development of the village. These earlier buildings are now interspersed with more recent housing development. 5. The appeal building is an attractive property, providing one such example of this earlier housing and so it makes a positive contribution to the significance of the CA, in understanding the historical development of the village. As the proposal lies within the CA, I have paid special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character and appearance of the CA, as required by section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act). The Council considers that the appeal property itself is a non- designated heritage asset within the CA and this is not disputed by the appellant. I have no reason to disagree. 6. The proposal would involve the introduction of a porch to the front elevation of the appeal property. The porch would be simple in form and would be of a proportionate size to the host building, thereby ensuring that the modest scale of the cottage is retained. The central position and design of the porch would retain the symmetry of the existing cottage. It would re-introduce the detailing of the existing front door and it would include a window to the south elevation, consisting of a multi-pane sliding sash with vertical emphasis, consistent in style with existing window openings. Further, the proposal would utilise materials sympathetic to the existing dwelling. For these reasons, whilst the proposal would result in change to this non-designated heritage asset, it would be a sympathetically designed addition to the property, and so it would not harm the character or appearance of the building, or the contribution it makes to the significance of the CA. 7. Due to the set back of the existing cottage and the presence of mature vegetation, the proposed porch would not appear overly prominent along this part of Main Street. The CA consists of a variety of properties in both age and style and at my site visit I noted several porches of differing sizes and styles throughout the village, on older and more modern properties. Therefore, the addition of the proposed porch would not be out of character at this location, it would preserve the character and appearance of the CA. 8. For the above reasons, the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the building itself, or the area. The proposal would therefore comply with saved Policies ENV1 and ENV25 of the Selby District Local Plan, February 2005, Policies SP1, SP18 and SP19 of the Selby District Core Strategy Local Plan, Adopted 22 October 2013, and NP Policy ELH4. These policies, collectively, and amongst other matters, seek to ensure that new development considers the effect of scale, form, position, design and materials on local character and distinctiveness, whilst conserving and where possible enhancing the historic environment and any distinctive elements therein. Appeal Decision APP/N2739/D/22/3311273 3 9. Further, the proposal is consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework, in terms of conserving heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, ensuring that new developments add to the overall quality of an area, and are sympathetic to the local character. Conditions 10. I have had regard to the conditions suggested by the Council. I have imposed a condition specifying the approved plans as this provides certainty. I have also imposed a condition requiring matching materials to safeguard the character and appearance of the appeal property and surrounding area. Conclusion 11. For the reasons set out above, having had regard to the development plan as a whole and all other material considerations, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. S Brook INSPECTOR