Case 3335759

47 Springbrook, Eynesbury, ST. NEOTS, PE19 2EB

Huntingdonshire District Council — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
23 August 2024
Authority
Huntingdonshire District Council
Inspector
Reed D
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Development type
Change of use
Appellant
Mrs Ionela Viorica Manolache
LPA reference
23/01786/FUL
ONS LPA code
E07000011
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
26 March 2024

Summary AI

The appeal was dismissed due to significant harm to the character and appearance of the street scene and increased highway risks, outweighing benefits to the occupiers of No 47.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Appeal Decision

47 Springbrook, Eynesbury, ST. NEOTS, PE19 2EB — Huntingdonshire District Council — Appeal Decision Site visit made on 16 August 2024 by David Reed BSc DipTP DMS MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 23 August 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/H0520/W/23/3335759 47 Springbrook, Eynesbury PE19 2EB • 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 Mrs I Manolache against the decision of Huntingdonshire District Council. • The application Ref 23/01786/FUL, dated 22 September 2023, was refused by notice dated 17 November 2023. • The development proposed is the change of use from amenity land to garden and erection of brick wall. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Main Issues 2. The main issues are: • the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the street scene; and • the effect of the proposal on highway safety. Reasons Character and appearance 3. The proposal is for the change of use and a new brick wall around a small grass area of amenity land to one side of No 47 Springbrook in order to incorporate it into the rear garden. The brick wall would be about 1.1 m high, a reduction from the 1.9 m which was previously refused planning permission1.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Appeal Decision

47 Springbrook, Eynesbury, ST. NEOTS, PE19 2EB — Huntingdonshire District Council — Appeal Decision No 47 is an end terrace house with its side elevation towards the road and a narrow side and rear garden surrounded by a tall brick wall. The area the subject of the appeal lies between the existing side boundary wall and the footway but extends out towards the carriageway due to the adjacent layby. 4. The larger rear garden with its surrounding brick wall would consequently project out towards the road, breaching the otherwise straight alignment of the garden wall alongside the property. Even with the wall reduced to about 1.1 m high this would appear as an odd and intrusive feature to passers-by along the road and an awkward change within the conventional layout of the housing 1 Ref 22/01546/FUL https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 2 Appeal Decision

47 Springbrook, Eynesbury, ST. NEOTS, PE19 2EB — Huntingdonshire District Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/H0520/W/23/3335759 estate. In addition, the grass margins along the road and its spacious nature would be eroded reducing its overall attractiveness. 5. The proposal would therefore significantly harm the character and appearance of the street scene in conflict with Policies LP11 and LP12 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 2019 (the HLP) and Policy A3 of the St Neots Neighbourhood Plan 2016. These require proposals to respond positively to their context, to avoid the introduction of incongruous and/or intrusive elements into key views and vistas and to reinforce local distinctiveness. Highway Safety 6. No 47 backs onto a communal parking area with its access adjacent to the appeal site. The proposed brick wall, even reduced in height to 1.1 m, and perhaps features within the rear garden, would obstruct visibility to the right when emerging from the parking area, a problem exacerbated by the slight curvature of the road at this point. The appellant suggests a mirror may assist visibility, but this would be highly unsatisfactory and, in any event, it is not clear where it could be mounted. 7.

Page 2 · Chunk 3 Appeal Decision

47 Springbrook, Eynesbury, ST. NEOTS, PE19 2EB — Huntingdonshire District Council — Appeal Decision The proposal would therefore significantly harm highway safety contrary to HLP Policy LP17 which requires proposals to take account of highway safety in relation to access to car parking. Conclusion 8. The proposal would provide additional rear garden space which would benefit the occupiers of No 47 but this is outweighed by the harm that would result to the character and appearance of the street scene together with increased highway risks and the associated conflict with the development plan. 9. Having regard to the above the appeal should be dismissed.

Page 2 · Chunk 4 David Reed

47 Springbrook, Eynesbury, ST. NEOTS, PE19 2EB — Huntingdonshire District Council — David Reed INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Character and appearance
Against appellant
¶3-5

The proposal would appear as an odd and intrusive feature to passers-by along the road, eroding the grass margins and reducing the overall attractiveness of the area, in conflict with Policies LP11 and LP12 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 2019 and Policy A3 of the St Neots Neighbourhood Plan 2016.

Highway safety
Against appellant
¶6-7

The proposed brick wall would obstruct visibility to the right when emerging from the parking area, exacerbating the slight curvature of the road, contrary to HLP Policy LP17.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
LP11, LP12, A3, LP17
Determinative

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 2 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 23 August 2024 under the Open Government Licence.