Garage wall material change at 390 Nottingham Road, Newthorpe

What was proposed

The application sought to change the approved detached garage’s external wall material from fairfaced blockwork to steel woodgrain wall cladding panels.

“Planning Committee 11 June 2025 On the submitted plans as part of the original application 22/00675/FUL it was stated the proposed garage walls would be constructed using new fairfaced blockwork to Local Planning Authority approval. Therefore, this variation of condition application 25/00223/VOC has been submitted to vary conditions 2 & 3 of 22/00675/FUL in relation to changing the proposed material for the external walls of the detached garage.”

“The application seeks planning permission for the variation of conditions 2 and 3 (proposed change of external wall material) of planning permission 22/00675/FUL. On the submitted plans as part of planning permission 22/00675/FUL it was stated the proposed garage walls would be constructed using new fairfaced blockwork to Local Planning Authority approval.”

Officer report

The site

The site is a semi-detached house with a long rear garden, where the detached garage frame had already been erected.

“The application site consists of a two storey semi-detached dwelling, with a rear garden of significant length located south-west of the dwelling. The detached garage is located within the rear (south-west) garden of the application site, with the frame of the garage already erected. The access to and from the application site is to the front (north-east) of the dwelling, which leads to adjacent road Nottingham Road, located north-east of the application site.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions

The garage was approved in 2022, and a 2025 non-material amendment allowed its footprint to be reduced.

“Planning 22/00675/FUL Construct detached garage in rear garden PERC 25/00222/NMA Non-material amendment of planning permission 22/00675/FUL to allow reduction in footprint PERU”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposed material was considered more residential, less prominent and unlikely to harm neighbours or highway safety.

“It is considered the proposed steel woodgrain wall cladding panels would be an improvement in terms of design compared to the fairfaced blockwork proposed as part of the original application 22/00675/FUL. This is because the proposed steel woodgrain wall cladding panels are considered to be more…”

“The material originally proposed as part of the variation would not have been supported due to it failing to respect the residential character of the surroundings. Therefore, it was requested the applicant provide a new material which would be more in keeping with the residential character of the site and surrounding area. It is considered the steel woodgrain wall cladding panels subsequently proposed by the applicant would provide a more residential character.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

No technical consultees were required, while one neighbour supported the application and seven objected during the original consultation.

“No comments from technical consultees are required for this application.”

“There were eight responses received from adjacent neighbouring properties and contributors in respect of the original consultation period for the application. One response raised no objection to the application. The remaining seven responses objected to the application for the following reasons:”

Officer report

Residents’ concerns

Further responses questioned the cladding’s colour and appearance, saying it would not blend with the surrounding gardens or match the original plans.

“There was a re-consultation period regarding the new proposed steel woodgrain wall cladding panels. There have been three responses received during the re-consultation period. The following concerns in regards to the new proposed steel woodgrain wall cladding panels were raised:”

“Not in accordance with the original plans approved as part of the initial application (reference: 22/00675/FUL) • The revised dark brown cladding materials proposed are almost black and little different to the anthracite colour originally proposed. • The revised cladding materials proposed will not help the structure blend into the local landscape which is entirely green and made up only of neighbours back gardens.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant, an objector and a ward member addressed the committee before the general debate.

The committee debate

Members discussed the new material’s colour and soundproofing, then agreed a motion to amend the cladding to a lighter colour with the applicant.

“Having considered all the representations before it the Committee commenced the debate. There was specific reference to the colour and sound proofing quality of the new material that had been proposed to clad the shed development.”

“It was proposed by Councillor D D Pringle and seconded by Councillor P A Smith that the cladding be amended to a lighter colour in agreement with the applicant. On being put to the meeting the motion was carried.”

Minutes

The final decision

The committee granted permission, subject to conditions including Arena Premium Composite Woodgrain Cladding in Graphite Grey and an agreement for a lighter colour.

“RESOLVED that planning permission be granted, with an agreement to be reached with the applicant for a lighter colour of materials and subject to the following conditions:”

“The external walls of the detached garage shall be constructed using Arena Premium Composite Woodgrain Cladding in Graphite Grey colour as shown in the website link received by the Local Planning Authority on 18 June 2025.”

Minutes