Appeal 3303784

The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing single storey outbuilding and erection of a single storey extension at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 22/00778/FUL, dated 23 February 2022, subject to the following

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: L100 Rev 1; A100 Rev 1; L101 Rev 3; A101 Rev 5; A102 Rev 5.

The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area, with particular regard to the Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).

[site address] is situated in open countryside. It is an attractive brick and stone built two-storey dwelling and range of barns and outbuildings. The Council have identified it as a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA), and it is located within the AONB.

The proposed extension would replace a small brick built shed with a larger structure of a similar design linked to the main house by a short, glazed corridor. Although the main part of the proposed extension would be larger than the existing shed and would step forward of the main front elevation of the house, it would not be as far forward as the existing shed. The proposal would fit comfortably with its surroundings and would not appear as a disproportionate addition to the existing dwelling or the site as a whole. The proposed extension has been sensitively designed to be barn-like in appearance and because of its separation from the main house, would retain a subordinate relationship with it and with the group of buildings as a whole.

The use of timber cladding alongside brick-built elements would not be out of keeping in its rural context. Whilst there would be a substantial amount of glazing in the proposal and its use may not be traditional, it would not appear incongruous. Rather, as with the glazed linking corridor, it would serve to distinguish new elements from old.

The appeal property is visible from nearby public rights of way. However, views of the proposal would be severely limited due to intervening buildings and trees. There would also be very limited visibility of the proposal from [address] given the undulating countryside, hedgerows and trees. There would, therefore, be no adverse effect on the natural beauty of the AONB.

The Council consider the appeal property to be an NDHA as it retains some historical interest as a group of traditional farm buildings contributing positively to its surroundings. The proposal would be a neutral addition to the asset within its overall form, in that would have simple barn-like detailing, albeit it would also be domestic in appearance. The proposed extension would be a modest addition and would not detract from the courtyard layout of the farm. Therefore, there would be no harm to the significance of the NDHA and consequently, no conflict with Framework paragraph 203 and the protection it affords the significance of non-designated heritage assets.

I am satisfied that the proposal would not harm the character and appearance of the appeal site or its surroundings nor would it harm the natural beauty of the AONB. Accordingly, there would be no conflict with policies HP2, HP3 or HS8 of the Harrogate District Local Plan 2020. There would also be no conflict with the guidance in the [address] Extension and [name] or [name].

I have considered the conditions suggested by the Council against the Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. I agree that a plans condition is necessary and reasonable to give certainty. A condition to ensure that the facing materials of the proposed extension match those of the main house is also necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.

For the reasons set out above having had regard to the development plan as a whole and all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.