Appeal 3321681

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of detached outbuilding (garden room) at 9 [site address] , Thurlstone, Barnsley [postcode] in accordance with the terms of application Ref 2022/1295, dated 17 December 2022, and subject to the following conditions:

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: location plan; proposed site plan; rear elevation; side elevation; proposed site front and side elevations.

No development shall take place above ground level until details of the proposed external colour of the outbuilding (garden room) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The description of the development above has been taken from the Council’s decision notice, as it is more concise than that outlined within the application form.

The main issue is whether the proposed development would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

The appeal property, which is an end-of-terrace dwelling, forms part of a grade II listed building (nos 1-9 [site address] ), within the Thurlstone Conservation Area. The rear garden of the appeal dwelling, where an existing extension sits, lies within the Green Belt.

The Government attaches great importance to Green Belts. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. Paragraph 149 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2021 (the Framework) lists the types of development that are not considered inappropriate in the Green Belt. These include, for the purposes of the appeal, the extension or alteration of a building provided it does not result in a disproportionate addition over and above the size of the original building.

Policy GB1 of the Barnsley Local Plan 2019 (LP) states that Green Belt will be protected from inappropriate development in accordance with national planning policy. Policy GB2 of the LP refers specifically to the replacement, extension and alteration of existing buildings in the Green Belt and allows for the extension or alteration of a building where the total size of the proposed and previous extensions does not exceed the size of the original building.

The proposed garden room would be located next to the rear boundary of the appeal site. Whilst the proposal is not an extension of the building’s fabric, it is an extension of the residential use, providing an incidental function within its curtilage, and it would sit in proximity of the host dwelling. It is reasonable therefore to consider the appeal scheme as an exception under paragraph 149 (c) of the Framework.

The Council referred to the footprint of the original dwelling and that of the existing extension in their assessment and concluded that the existing extension represents approximately a 91% increase in the footprint of the original dwelling. The proposed extension would add to that footprint such that cumulatively the existing and proposed extensions would increase the footprint of the original building by over 100%. However, there are other approaches to determining what might be considered a disproportionate addition and the supporting text for Policy GB2 of the LP informs that the sizes of a building as existing and proposed will be compared by reference to their gross floorspace. 10.The original dwelling is a three-storey building of considerable scale. The existing extension is a single storey structure with a lean-to-roof, which extends to the rear/side of the host dwelling. In terms of both floorspace and volume, the existing extension is significantly smaller than the original dwelling. The proposed garden room would have a height between 2.05m-2.2m. Given the modest size of the proposal, when taken cumulatively with the existing extension, the additions would not exceed the size of the original dwelling in terms of floorspace and volume. 11.Accordingly, whilst the totality of the extensions would slightly exceed 100% of the existing footprint, its overall scale, when taken cumulatively with that of the existing extension, would be considerable smaller than the scale of the original dwelling. As such, the effect of the garden room on the host dwelling would be limited and even when taken cumulatively with the previous extension would 2 not, in visual terms, result in a disproportionate addition over and above the size of the original building particularly given its physical separation from the original dwelling and its modest size. 12.Consequently, I find that the proposal would not be inappropriate development in the Green Belt and would accord with [name] GB1 and GB2 and the provisions of the Framework. 13.With respect to openness and the purposes of the Green Belt, given my findings, the proposal would, by definition, not have an adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt or the purposes of including land within in. As the proposal does not amount to inappropriate development, very special circumstances are not required to justify the proposal.