Part-demolition and rebuilding of dwelling, single storey extension, roof reconstruction to a slightly higher ridge height, introduction of dormer windows and external alterations

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 25 June 2026 by D Cleary MTCP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 10 July 2026 Appeal Ref: 6010389 Shawfield, Main Street, Bleasby, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire NG14 7FU • 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 Samuel Sparks against the decision of Newark & Sherwood District Council. • The application Ref is 26/00068/HOUSE. • The development proposed is described as the Part-demolition and rebuilding of dwelling, single storey extension, roof reconstruction to a slightly higher ridge height, introduction of dormer windows and external alterations. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the part-demolition and rebuilding of dwelling, single storey extension, roof reconstruction to a slightly higher ridge height, introduction of dormer windows and external alterations at Shawfield, Main Street, Bleasby, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire NG14 7FU in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 26/00068/HOUSE, and subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans referenced: 1439/1 Rev A - Proposed Elevations and Floor Plans 1439/2 - Block Plan 1439/3 - Location Plan 1439/4 - Existing Elevations and Floor Plans 1439/4 Rev A - Proposed Demolition Part Retrospective 2) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby approved shall be as detailed on the approved plans and within the application. 3) Before the development hereby approved is first occupied, the first-floor window openings on the west elevation, as detailed on the approved plans, shall be obscured glazed to level 4 or higher on the Pilkington scale of privacy (or equivalent) and shall be non-opening up to a minimum height of 1.7m above the internal floor level of the room in which it is installed. Thereafter, obscure glazing, to this specification, shall be retained for the lifetime of the development Appeal Decision 6010389 2 Preliminary Matters 2. In the banner above, and in my formal decision, I have taken the description of development from the Council’s decision notice, as it provides a more accurate and complete description of the proposal. I have removed the phrase “part retrospective”, as this does not describe an act of development. 3. During my site visit I observed that partial demolition had commenced, although the proposed rebuilding works had not. Permission is therefore sought retrospectively in part. As the works are incomplete, I have considered the appeal on the basis of the submitted plans. Main Issue 4. The main issue is whether the development would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Bleasby Conservation Area. Reasons 5. The appeal site lies within the Bleasby Conservation Area (the BCA). Under Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, special attention must be paid to preserving or enhancing its character or appearance. The BCA is relatively small and centred on the historic core around the Church and its adjoining routes. It contains a number of historic buildings along Main Street, Gypsy Lane and Borrow Bread Lane, together with open fields at its eastern edge and extensive mature vegetation. Its significance derives from the historic pattern of development, the architectural and aesthetic quality of its traditional buildings, and the verdant rural setting that frames them. 6. The appeal relates to a modest mid-20th-century bungalow set within a generous, well-landscaped backland plot accessed via a narrow shared drive from Main Street. Its substantial setback and enveloping vegetation mean it is largely screened from Main Street. From the public right of way alongside the site, the dwelling is appreciable behind vegetation but reads as a modest, recessive feature within the BCA. Its limited architectural interest and discreet siting within a well-vegetated plot mean it makes a neutral contribution to the significance of the BCA, with the mature landscaping providing a modest positive contribution. 7. The proposal includes partial demolition to facilitate a modest increase in eaves and ridge height and the installation of dormer windows on both roof slopes. The uplift in height would be limited, resulting in only a small increase in overall mass. The dormers would be set away from the sides of the roof and above eaves level, ensuring they remain proportionate and do not dominate the roof form. I also note that a dormer of similar design was previously approved at the site1, establishing the acceptability of such an addition in principle and provides a relevant benchmark for assessing the current proposal. 8. The distance of the dwelling from Main Street means that there would be limited perceived change in scale from the public highway. Furthermore, due to the modest increase in height and mass there would be little material change in any views into 1 Application Ref: 25/00334/HOUSE Appeal Decision 6010389 3 the BCA from the wider countryside above the landscaped boundaries, including from the public right of way immediately adjacent to the site boundary. 9. I recognise that the increased height may be more perceptible from neighbouring properties. However, the dwelling sits away from shared boundaries, and mature landscaping provides substantial screening. Only the roof would be visible above boundary vegetation, and the modest increase in height would not materially alter the existing visual relationship. Accordingly, no adverse effect on neighbouring outlook would arise. 10. The proposed development would result in a dwelling broadly comparable in scale and massing to the existing building and to that previously approved. Its discreet backland position and landscaped surroundings would ensure it remains an unobtrusive element within the BCA. Given the modest nature of the changes, the proposal would not diminish the historic pattern of development or the verdant qualities that contribute to the area’s significance. Accordingly, the character and appearance of the BCA would be preserved, resulting in a neutral overall effect. 11. For the above reasons, the development would preserve the character and appearance of the BCA. Therefore, the development complies with Core Policy 14 of the Newark and Sherwood Amended Core Strategy (2019) and Policies DM6 and DM9 of the Newark and Sherwood Allocations and Development Management Development Plan Document (2013). Together, amongst other things, these seek to protect or enhance the historic environment, and require householder development to respect the existing dwelling. Other Matters 12. The appeal site is within close proximity to two listed buildings2 and could be considered to fall within their setting. Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (LBCA Act) requires me to have special regard to the desirability of preserving listed buildings, or their setting, or any feature of special architectural or historic interest which they possess. The Council raise no objection to the effect on these listed buildings. Given the limited difference in built form arising from the modest scale of the proposed development, along with the presence of established intervening landscaping, I agree that there would be limited perceived change to the setting of either listed building. Therefore, I have no reason to disagree with the Council’s conclusions on the effect on listed buildings. 13. I note the representations made by third parties raising concerns on various matters. The scheme includes a roof dormer which would include windows that face towards a neighbouring property (Rudean Lodge). These windows would serve a bathroom, en-suite and landing. The submitted plans demonstrate that these windows would be obscure glazed and non-opening below 1.7m from floor level. The nature of the rooms means that obscure glazing would be entirely appropriate, and such glazing could be secured by condition, and retained in perpetuity. Therefore, I am satisfied that the development would not result in an unacceptable level of overlooking or loss of privacy to internal or external spaces within Rudean Lodge. 2 Fishermans (Grade II) and The Old Hall (Grade II*) Appeal Decision 6010389 4 14. In terms of the relationship with The Old Hall, the previous approval included a first- floor opening facing towards that property. An additional first floor opening is now proposed. The dwelling would be no closer to The Old Hall than that which was previously approved and, therefore, I agree with the Council that the effects of the development would be no greater than that which has already been deemed acceptable. 15. I note that demolition works have commenced at the site, and I understand the concerns raised by third parties. However, the part-retrospective nature of the proposal is not determinative. My assessment must focus on the planning merits of the scheme and its compliance with the Development Plan and relevant legislation. Conditions 16. As the development has commenced it would not be necessary to attach the standard commencement condition. A condition to require compliance with the submitted plans is necessary for certainty. A condition requiring the materials to accord with those detailed within the application is necessary in the interest of the character and appearance of the BCA. Finally, a condition requiring the first-floor openings within the west side elevation to be obscure glazed is necessary in the interests of preserving the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. Conclusion 17. For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed. D Cleary INSPECTOR