Development proposed is: Replace 21 existing old PVC windows and old original windows and doors to recycled UPVC flush casement, woodgrain colour agate grey., replace 2 patio doors with UPVC flush casement, woodgrain finish - colour agate grey, replace 1 entrance door with UPVC flush casement, woodgrain finish- colour agate grey, replace 1 front door with composite solid door-colour granite
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Heritage & Conservation
Character & Appearance
Policy Weight
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 12 June 2024
By Ian McHugh DipTP MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 2nd September 2024
Appeal Ref: APP/M2840/D/24/3339832
11A Park Walk, Brigstock, Kettering, NN14 2HH
• The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as
amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission.
• The appeal is made by Miss Sam Brocklebank against the decision of North
Northamptonshire Council.
• The application Ref NE/23/00807/FUL.
• The development proposed is: Replace 21 existing old PVC windows and old original
windows and doors to recycled UPVC flush casement, woodgrain colour agate grey.,
replace 2 patio doors with UPVC flush casement, woodgrain finish - colour agate grey,
replace 1 entrance door with UPVC flush casement, woodgrain finish- colour agate grey,
replace 1 front door with composite solid door-colour granite.
Decision
1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the replacement
of existing windows to recycled UPVC flush casement, woodgrain, colour agate
grey, Replace 2 patio doors with UPVC flush casement, woodgrain finish -
colour agate grey, Replace 1 entrance door with UPVC flush casement,
woodgrain finish - colour agate grey, Replace 1 front door with composite solid
door - colour granite at 11A Park Walk, Brigstock, Kettering, NN14 2HH, in
accordance with the terms of the application reference NE/23/00807/FUL,
subject to the following conditions:
1) The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than 3 years from
the date of this decision.
2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance
with the following approved plans: 1:1250 scale location plan; 1:200
scale block plan; Halo System 10 Technical Drawing (page 54); Frame
colour and door detail date stamped by Council 24 July 2023; and
Quotation details reference 011946, date stamped by Council
24 July 2023.
Procedural Matters
2. During my initial consideration of the appeal, it was unclear to me as to what
plans and documents the Council had considered when it determined the
planning application. Therefore, I sought clarification several times from both
parties and I am now satisfied that the plans and documents listed in my
decision above are correct.
3. I have also noted that the description of the development referred to the
replacement of 21 existing windows. However, the detailed quotation and
Appeal Decision APP/M2840/D/24/3339832
2
specification provided shows a greater number. At my site visit it was
confirmed that the proposal is to replace all the windows. It is also clear that
the Council considered the application on this basis and I have, therefore,
amended the description slightly to accord with the appellant’s intentions and
the Council’s understanding.
Main Issue
4. The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of
both the existing dwelling and the Brigstock Conservation Area (CA).
Reasons
5. The appeal property is an old detached two-storey dwelling, which is situated in
a backland position within the village and the CA. The dwelling is an
amalgamation of different aged buildings constructed of both natural stone and
brickwork. The property is largely screened from public view by other
properties along Park Walk, but notwithstanding, the Council considers it to be
a building that makes a positive contribution to the significance of the CA. The
CA is subject to an Article 4 Direction, which means that proposals for
replacement windows normally require permission from the Council.
6. The proposal is to replace the doors and windows at the property with upvc
windows and a composite door. The windows would be agate grey, flush fitting
casements. These would replace mainly timber, plus some upvc windows, that
vary in terms of their style and condition. At present, the existing windows
detract from the appearance of the dwelling, because of their relatively poor
condition and the mix of finishes.
7. It is a statutory requirement when determining planning applications within
conservation areas that decision makers pay special attention to the desirability
of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. This
requirement and the need to respect local character is reinforced by Policies 2
and 8 of the North Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy 2016 and by Policies
11, 12 and 13 of the East Northamptonshire Local Plan 2024.
8. The Council considers that the proposal would fail to preserve or enhance the
CA and the existing dwelling, because of the use of non-traditional materials.
Whilst there are other examples of upvc windows within the CA, I observed
during my site visit that the majority of other properties in the vicinity of the
appeal site have wooden openings. The Council also points to recent
application for upvc windows on a property elsewhere in the CA that was
refused (although no details have been supplied).
9. The subject of upvc windows in conservation areas is often contentious and I
accept that there is often an argument against them as a matter of principle.
However, in my opinion, each case should be considered on its merits, having
regard to the appearance of the existing dwelling, its position in relation to
other properties and the contribution that the fenestration makes to the
character and appearance of the CA. Furthermore, modern upvc windows have
developed significantly in recent years and I consider that they can be
successfully used on historic buildings.
10. I consider that the proposed windows and door, would enhance the appeal
property. The opening casements would complement the age and form of the
dwelling due to their proportions and flush fitting. In addition, the wood grain
Appeal Decision APP/M2840/D/24/3339832
3
effect would have a similar appearance to natural timber and the agate grey
colour would be appropriate. Furthermore, the replacement composite door
would be similar in appearance to the existing door.
11. I acknowledge concerns that by granting permission a precedent would be set
for other similar proposals within the CA. However, having regard to the
considerations that I have listed in paragraph 9 above, I do not share this
concern and my decision is based on the site’s location within the CA and the
characteristics of the appeal property.
12. I have noted that the Council would be prepared to allow replacement windows
on a like for like basis. However, that would result in a mix of materials,
which, in my opinion, would appear odd and a uniform appearance as proposed
would be highly preferable.
13. For the above reasons, I consider that the proposal would not have a harmful
effect on the character and appearance of either the existing dwelling or the CA
and that it would not conflict with the provisions of the Development Plan, as
referred to above.
Conditions
14. The Council has suggested conditions in the event of the appeal being allowed.
In addition to the standard time condition relating to the period for
commencing the development. For reasons of clarification, I have also
imposed a condition specifying the approved plans and documents.
Conclusion
15. For the reasons given above, it is concluded that the appeal be allowed.
Ian McHugh
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.