We are delighted to have secured permission at appeal for a scheme within a conservation area in Middlesbrough, involving external alterations to a shop front, including an additional access door to the upper floors, a change of use of the upper floors into office space, replacement of windows on the rear elevation, installation of two roof lights on the front elevation, a single-storey rear extension and the installation of a rear dormer window. In this case, the dispute between us and the Council related to the external alterations to the shop front, including an additional access door to the upper floors, and the installation of a rear dormer window.
Given the extent of variation in shop fronts on the road the appeal property is located, together with the design cues in the proposed design from the current shop front, which included the retention of the stall riser and recessed doorway, a replacement shop front which includes an additional doorway would not be uncommon, the Inspector found that the loss of the historic shop frontage would amount to less than substantial harm. Where a development would lead to less than substantial harm to a heritage asset, the proposal may be justified if the public benefits of the proposal significantly outweigh the harm – take a look at our blog about Understanding Significance and Avoiding Harm to Heritage Assets to find out more about this.
The Inspector noted that the dormer would not follow the fenestration set to the rear of the property, and that its width would be wider than the window to the floor below; however, despite being visible from within the rear lane and nearby properties, its overall width and projection from the roof slope would retain a subservient appearance so as not to appear as an incongruous addition.
Overall, the Inspector concluded that the reopening of the ground-floor retail unit would be a positive addition to the local centre and that the office use to the first floor would be appropriate, attracting additional footfall and employment opportunities to the area. The use of a timber shop front, which takes design cues from a traditional design and retains the stall riser, also contributes towards the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. In closing, the Inspector found that these were sufficient public benefits to outweigh the level of harm identified to the heritage asset.
Congratulations to our client and Steve Dodds, SJD Architects Ltd who produced the plans.
Related content
Should you receive a refusal for your planning proposals or wish to appeal conditions imposed on an approval knowing your options is important, don’t worry…we’ve covered this in an eBook about Appeals.
As well as other blogs relevant to this case:
- Know your Options if your Planning Application is Refused
- Top 10 Tips when considering Appealing a Planning Refusal
- How to Write a Compelling Grounds of Appeal Statement
- Appealing Planning Decisions – A Comprehensive Toolkit
- Securing Planning Permission for a Site which has been Refused Planning Permission
- Common mistakes made when applying for planning permission
- Should I apply for an award of costs during a Planning Appeal?
- Can a Fallback position help secure planning permission?
- A Practical Guide to Conservation Areas
If you’re not sure if you need help from a Town Planner take a look at blog on When to Hire a Town Planner our download a Guide on How to Choose a Town Planner.
