2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 16 November 2021 by R Sabu BA(Hons), MA, BArch, PgDip, RIBA, ARB an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 2nd December 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/Z1510/W/21/3272164 2 Lavender Cottage, Blackmore End, Wethersfield CM7 4DL • 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 Mr Andrew Pipe against the decision of Braintree District Council. • The application Ref 20/01599/FUL, dated 26 September 2020, was refused by notice dated 22 December 2020. • The development proposed is erection of dwellinghouse. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. I note the Section 2 - Publication Draft Local Plan June 2017 (Section 2). However, since there is no certainty that the Policies within will be adopted in their current form, I attribute them limited weight. 3. Amended drawings were submitted as part of the appeal1 which show elevations with a window omitted and an alternative parking plan. The amendments are minor and would not deprive those who should have been consulted on the changes of the opportunity of consultation. I have therefore had regard to the amended plans. 4.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision The Council included only one reason for refusal but with several main issues and policies therein, I have therefore considered each of the main issues with reference to only those policies that are directly relevant in each case. Main Issues 5. The main issues are: • whether the proposed development would provide a suitable location for housing with regard to the character and appearance of the area and the accessibility of services and facilities; • the effect of the proposal on highway safety; and • whether the proposed development would provide a suitable living environment for future occupiers with regard to light. 1 19.466 101 A and 19.466 106 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision The Council included only one reason for refusal but with several main issues and policies therein, I have therefore considered each of the main issues with reference to only those policies that are directly relevant in each case. Main Issues 5. The main issues are: • whether the proposed development would provide a suitable location for housing with regard to the character and appearance of the area and the accessibility of services and facilities; • the effect of the proposal on highway safety; and • whether the proposed development would provide a suitable living environment for future occupiers with regard to light. 1 19.466 101 A and 19.466 106 https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/Z1510/W/21/3272164 Reasons Location 6. The site lies outside of settlement boundaries and is therefore within the countryside in the terms of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy Adopted September 2011 (CS). CS Policy CS5 states that development outside town development boundaries, village envelopes and industrial development limits will be strictly controlled to uses appropriate to the countryside, in order to protect and enhance the landscape character and biodiversity, geodiversity and amenity of the countryside. Since the proposal is for a market dwelling and lies outside of settlement boundaries, it would conflict with this Policy. 7. Bovingdon Road is primarily characterised by detached and semi-detached dwellings with moderate spacing such that the area has an open, semi-rural and spacious character and appearance. 8. The proposed dwelling would be sited between No 2 Lavender Cottage (No 2), which is a semi-detached dwelling, and Oak Grove, a detached property. As such, given the proximity to nearby dwellings, the site is not isolated in the terms of the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework). 9.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision While the space adjacent to No 2 is occupied by a garage, since it is single storey, it allows views through the gap between the two storey dwellings to the open countryside beyond. The erection of the proposed dwelling would largely screen this view and significantly reduce the gap between the existing dwellings such that the open spacious character of the site would be greatly diminished. 10. Furthermore, the proposed plot width would be significantly less than others along this part of the road, such that the proposal would harmfully depart from the prevailing spacious pattern of development, appearing overly large for the size of the plot. 11. The form of the building would echo that of Oak Grove and other dwellings in the area and would be roughly in line with this adjacent building. In addition, the height of the ridge of the roof would be similar to that of the neighbouring properties. However, given the narrow width of the plot that would result, and the significant reduction in separation distances between buildings, the proposal would unacceptably diminish the spacious semi-rural character of the area. 12.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision Policy RLP16 of the Braintree District Local Plan Review, Adopted July 2005 (LPR) states that where there is a defined nucleus of at least ten dwellings and where it would not be detrimental to the character of the surroundings, exceptions may be made to Policies RLP 2 and 12 for the filling of a gap, for a single dwelling, between existing dwellings, in hamlets and small groups of dwellings. From the evidence it does not appear to be likely that more than one dwelling could be accommodated on the site. However, in any event, since the scheme would be detrimental to the character of the surroundings, it would conflict with this Policy. 13. I acknowledge the evidence regarding Section 2 Policy LPP1. However, even if significant weight were to be given to this Policy, given the harm to the character and appearance of the area, the proposal would conflict with this https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/Z1510/W/21/3272164 Policy which seeks development within development boundaries that would not result in material adverse detriment to the existing character of the settlement. 14. The nearest settlements include Wethersfield, Beazley End and Shalford. While they have some services and facilities including schools and GP surgeries, these appear to be limited. In addition, Bovingdon Road lacks footpaths and streetlights such that future occupiers would be likely to be reliant on the private vehicle for access to services and facilities. Moreover, it would be likely that, once in their vehicles, future occupiers would be likely to travel a greater distance to larger settlements such as Halstead and Braintree for access to a wide range of services and facilities. Therefore, the proposal would result in adverse environmental effects. 15. Consequently, the proposed development would not provide a suitable location for housing with regard to the character and appearance of the area and the accessibility of services and facilities. Therefore, it would conflict with CS Policies CS1 and CS5 and LPR Policy RLP2 which direct new development to within settlement boundaries.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision The proposal would also conflict with LPR Policies RLP10 and RLP16 which requires the density and massing of residential development to be related to the characteristics of the site, and single dwellings, between existing dwellings, in hamlets and small groups of dwellings not to be detrimental to the character of the surroundings, among other things. It would conflict with LPR Policy RLP90 which seeks a high standard of layout and design in all developments. In addition, the scheme would conflict with CS Policy CS7 which requires, among other things, that future development will be provided in accessible locations to reduce the need to travel. Highway safety 16. The site would provide two off street parking spaces. The updated site plan provided by the Appellant as part of the appeal shows an alternative layout to that determined by the Council. While it indicates a greater area for turning, there is little detailed evidence before me, such as tracking information, to demonstrate that vehicles could turn within the site and exit in a forward gear without encroaching into the driveway of No 2.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision In addition, given the tall hedge along the front of the site, motorists reversing into the road would be unlikely to see oncoming vehicles until they are within close proximity. As such, the parking arrangement would be likely to increase the risk of collision and an unacceptable impact on highway safety. 17. While the existing parking arrangements at No 2 and other properties along the road may also require vehicles to reverse onto the highway, this does not justify the unacceptable impact on highway safety that would be likely to occur as result of the proposal. 18. Consequently, the proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety. Therefore, it would conflict with LPR Policy RLP10 which requires the massing of residential development to be related to the extent to which car parking can be achieved within a satisfactory layout, among other things. https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/Z1510/W/21/3272164 Living environment 19. The building would be orientated such that the rear elevation would face towards the north east. However, since the living area would benefit from large full height bi-fold doors, this room would receive adequate daylight and sunlight. Similarly, bedroom 1 would have a reasonably wide window such that this room would also benefit from sufficient light. Given the projection of the gable projection at the front of the building, the front window of bedroom 3 would be overshadowed for large parts of the day. However, since this room would be dual aspect, it too, would receive sufficient levels of light. 20. Consequently, the proposed development would provide a suitable living environment for future occupiers. Therefore, it would not conflict with the Framework in this respect. Other Matters 21. The proposal would meet the adopted standards for parking and private amenity. However, these matters do not weigh in favour of the and carry neutral weight in the planning balance. 22. I acknowledge other scheme granted planning permission by the Council includes those at Church Lane, Haverhill Road and Church Street as well as the schemes at Pebmarsh.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — Appeal Decision However, these developments appear to be some distance from the Appeal site such that they are not directly comparable. In any event, each case must be determined on its individual merits. Planning Balance 23. The Council states that it can demonstrate a five-year housing land supply. 24. The proposal would contribute a dwelling to the local housing supply. In addition, future occupiers would be likely to provide economic and social benefits to the local community. Furthermore, there would be temporary economic benefits during the construction phase. However, given the scale of development, these benefits attract limited weight. 25. The scheme would not provide a suitable location for housing as it would result in unacceptable harm to the character and appearance of the area and would be likely to result in adverse environmental effects. Therefore, even if the Council were unable to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, the adverse effects would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. Conclusion 26. For the reasons given above, the proposed development would conflict with the development plan and in the absence of material considerations to indicate otherwise, the appeal is dismissed.

2 Lavender Cottages, Blackmore End, Wethersfield, CM7 4DL — Braintree District Council — R Sabu INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4