Timber carport

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 20 August 2026 by Sarah Colebourne MA, MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date:08 September 2026 Appeal Ref: 6012771 Poplars Farm, 38 Thrapston Road, Brampton, Huntingdon, PE28 4TD • 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 Mr King against the decision of Huntingdonshire District Council. • The application Ref is 26/00091/HHFUL. • The development proposed is a timber carport. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a timber carport at Poplars Farm, 38 Thrapston Road, Brampton, Huntingdon, PE28 4TD in accordance with the application Ref 26/00091/HHFUL, subject to the following conditions:- 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 1367/SPLP; 1367-PE. 3) The brick and tile materials to be used in the construction of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing dwelling. Preliminary matter 2. Since the application was determined, a revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published in August 2026. However, as any policies that are material to this decision have not fundamentally changed, I am satisfied that this has not prejudiced any party. I have had regard to the latest version of the Framework in reaching my decision. Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. Reasons 4. The appeal dwelling is a large, modern two storey house with a wide front elevation, one of five dwellings on a private spur off the main Thrapston Road which also provides access to a day nursery. It is sited on a wide plot and has an attached double garage to one side and a generous parking area that occupies Appeal Decision 6012771 2 most of the frontage, set back behind a high gate at the access and a tall evergreen hedge along the front boundary with the access road that continues to the end dwelling and the nursery. 5. The proposed carport would be sited in a corner of the frontage furthest from the access and adjacent to a timber fence along the side boundary and the front hedge, at a slightly lower ground level than the access road. It would have a pitched roof and would be comparable to the size of a single garage. As such, its size and scale would be subordinate to this large dwelling and given the size of the plot it would maintain its spacious character. The proposed design comprises a brick plinth with timber walls and a tiled roof, which would result in a high quality and solid appearance that, subject to a condition for matching brick and tile materials, would complement the dwelling. 6. Although there are no other structures in frontages of the other dwellings, the undeveloped front gardens are not clearly perceived in the street scene due to the high, solid fencing that surrounds them and this gives an enclosed character to the approach along the access road. I agree with the appellant that the lack of uniformity, variety of plot sizes and orientation of the five dwellings means that the street scene is not characterised by a rigid or uninterrupted frontage. The appeal site and its access are offset from the access road and together with the high fencing along the frontages of the other dwellings, this would limit views of the carport until the site access is reached. The carport would then be seen in the context of the appeal dwelling and its neighbour and the nursery building on the opposite side of the access road. Given its discreet position, its modest size and its sympathetic design and materials, it would not be at all dominant in the street scene and would harmonise acceptably with the other buildings. 7. Although the Huntingdonshire Design Guide SPD (2017) advises that garages and carports should be aligned with or set back from the principal elevation, I agree with the appellant that as supplementary guidance rather than adopted policy, it should be applied flexibly and given the particular circumstances of this site, it is not directly relevant. The proposal would accord with development plan policies LP11 and LP12 in ‘Huntingdonshire’s Local Plan to 2036’ (2019) (LP) which together seek to ensure that proposals contribute positively to the area's character, successfully integrate with adjoining buildings and create attractive and appropriately scaled built frontages. The Framework has similar objectives. Conditions 8. The condition for materials referred to earlier is necessary and reasonable in the interests of the character and appearance of the area. As well as the standard commencement condition, a condition is necessary requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, to provide certainty. Conclusion 9. For the reasons given above, I conclude that the proposed development would accord with the development plan and there are no material considerations that would outweigh that. The appeal should be allowed. Sarah Colebourne INSPECTOR