Wiltshire homeowner told they cannot keep changes to house

The owners of the property on Frome Road in Trowbridge were also refused permission for a dropped kerb to facilitate a parking area at the rear of the property.

The decision comes just over two months after the owners of a property on Frome Road filed a planning application with Wiltshire Council seeking retrospective planning permission for works to its roof and exterior that have been done but remain unauthorised by the council.

As outlined in the April 27 application, the works that were carried out before permission was granted included removal of a chimney, replacement of roof tiles with slate, and covering the home’s exterior in a “silicon-based rendering”.

The project was started in October 2025, and turned a house the applicant described as having fallen into a state of “severe architectural dereliction” into a “high-performance building envelope that aligns with the traditional vernacular of the streetscape.”

In addition to the works already carried out, the homeowner was also seeking the council’s blessing to drop the kerb outside their home to create two parking bays to the rear of the property.

Wiltshire Council, the authority that passes judgement on such matters, did not agree with the judgement on the changes to the house, finding that they mean the home now harms the setting and significance of a historic area.

A photo of the house on the end of a terrace on Frome Road. (Image: Wiltshire Council)

Full access to all of our articles online and on the app, fewer adverts, a better reading experience, exclusive competitions and more - all for less than the price of a cup of coffee. ☕️Subscribe now! - https://t.co/t7A1ayW7mR pic.twitter.com/Dk1fvaFm1K

— Wiltshire Times (@wiltshiretimes) April 13, 2026

The decision to refuse permission was published by Wiltshire Council on July 6, with the director of planning citing three reasons for doing so.

The document states that the home’s design has an “unsympathetic and incongruous design”, and that the work detracted from the visual amenity of the surrounding area.

Decision making planners also stated that the plans for a dropped kerb at the house’s rear would have an “unacceptable impact on highway safety”, with its “inadequate access and failure to meet visibility requirements”.

A number of Wiltshire Council’s core planning policies were broached in relation to the plans, with the homeowners found to have been contrary to several core policy without “convincing justification.”

The officer’s report on the application states that while it was noted that neighbouring properties had been painted without planning consent, paint “does not entail the same high level of harm as external insulation and a silicon-based render that will trap moisture within and lead to dampness and then structure failure of the soft heritage bricks.”

Ahead of their conclusion, the officer commented that the works carried out had removed “all architectural detailing” that distinguishes the area, such as continuous clay tiles.

The officer writes: “Removing these details by adding unsympathetic and incongruous details such as external render and slate tiles is poor design which alters the key traditional design elements of the terrace, harming the character of the Conservation Area and altering the legibility of the subject dwelling and its inclusion with the heritage terrace.

How the house looked before its transformation. (Image: Google Street View)

As well as the unsympathetic and incongruous design, the “use of materials and impact on architectural detailing” was also found to harm “significance of the heritage assets”.

That the property was previous in a “poor state of repair” was not considered sufficient justification for the works done.

Ahead of their conclusion, the officer wrote: “The proposed development would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Trowbridge (Newtown) Conservation Area.”

Regarding the bid for a dropped kerb, the officer wrote: “The proposed development would result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, and that the impact would be severe given the narrow and constrained nature of the road, with little to no visibility, and no mitigation seemingly available.”