Appeal 3315269

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey rear extension at [site address] , [address], Billington, Lancashire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 3/2022/0970, dated 17 October 2022, subject to the following conditions:

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

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing no. PL/07; Drawing no. PL/08; and Location Plan 3/2021/0859.

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 appellant has described the development as retrospective in the application form, however I have removed this from the decision as this proposal is not for what has been built on the site in its current form, which has been subject to a previous planning application and appeal, but an alternatively designed scheme.

The site is located within the Green Belt and the appellant and Council agree that the proposed development would not be inappropriate development within the Green Belt, and would not harm the openness or permanence of the Green Belt. I see no reason to disagree with their conclusions in this regard.

Therefore, the main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area.

The appeal site is a semi-detached property located within a small cluster of dwellings off [address]. The property is constructed from traditional stone and has a historic character and was formally a traditional agricultural barn. The character of the surrounding area is rural, with views downhill from the site across surrounding countryside.

The proposed extension has a catslide roof which is a continuation of the existing main roof to the property. Whilst this would extend the roof plane on one half of the semi-detached property, due to the traditional design and proposed materials it would not appear alien to or disrupt the character of the building to the extent to be detrimental to the building as a whole. In my view the building could still be read as a traditional former agricultural building with the proposed extension.

The extension would be constructed from stone to match the main dwelling which is an appropriate material. The proposed fenestration is in proportion with the host dwelling, would use appropriate materials, and is not at odds with the design of the dwelling. The size of the proposed extension is modest and in proportion with the main dwelling and would not dominate it. The proposed design is sympathetic to the existing dwelling and reflects the character of the host property and is therefore acceptable.

The property is visible from public vantage points in the area, however for the reasons mentioned, the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the character of the host dwelling or the character of the surrounding area.

For these reasons, I conclude that the character and appearance of the area would not be adversely affected by the proposed development. As such, the proposed development does not conflict with policy DMG1 of the [name] 2008-2028 A Local Plan for Ribble Valley adopted 16 December 2014 which seeks to requires development to be sympathetic to existing and proposed land uses in terms of its size, intensity and nature as well as scale, massing, style, features and building materials.

The proposal accords with the National Planning Policy Framework having regard to paragraph 130 which requires developments to be sympathetic to local character and history, while not preventing or discouraging change.

I note that the Council considered that the proposal did not affect the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers or offer habitat value for roosting bats, I have no reason to disagree with these conclusions based on the information provided and my observations. Therefore, these matters have a neutral effect on the overall planning balance.

The Council has provided the decision notice and appeal decision for a previously refused application at the site for the existing single storey rear extension. Based on my site visit where the extension was in situ and appeared complete, this relates to a larger, bulkier and more modern design which appears overly domestic and more prominent than the scheme before me. Accordingly, there are material differences between that development and the proposal before me. Therefore, this matter has a neutral effect on the overall

I have considered the conditions suggested by the Council. In addition to the standard time condition, in my judgement, conditions are also necessary in respect of ensuring the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans, in matching materials, to provide certainty and to safeguard the character and appearance of the area.

For the reasons set out having regard to the development plan as a whole and all other matters raised, the appeal is allowed.