Appeal 3330022

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single-storey side extension at [site address] , [site address] , [site address] , Withybrook, Warwickshire, [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref R23/0153, dated 3 February 2023, and the plans submitted with it, 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 plan: 23.0202.GA.101a

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

The site lies within the Coventry-Rugby Green Belt. The National Planning Policy Framework (The Framework) establishes, in paragraph 154, that the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt should be regarded as inappropriate unless one of certain specified exceptions applies. These include the extension of a building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building. Policy GP2 of the Council’s Local Plan 2011-2031 (LP) indicates that development will only be permitted in the circumstances where National Policy on Green Belt permits. On this basis, the development plan policy conforms with National Policy on development in Green Belts.

In this case, the proposal would appear to add only a little over 10% to the size of the original building, and the Council accepts that this would not represent a disproportionate addition. I concur with that view, and the proposal would not, therefore, be inappropriate development in the Green Belt. On this basis, further consideration of openness and purposes is not required.

In the light of paragraph 3 above, the main issue in this case is: • The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host property and the surrounding area.

[site address] is part of a converted group of farm buildings. The group includes a two-storey block running approximately north-south through the centre of what is effectively a large corner plot at the junction of [site address] and [address], on the edge of the small settlement of Withybrook. There are single-storey wings projecting to the west from the main block, such that the group has the nature of a courtyard surrounded on three sides by ex-farm buildings. The appeal property consists of part of the main block and the northern of the two projecting wings. The topography of the site is such that the buildings are set a little below the level of [address] to the north.

The proposed extension would run along a significant length of the northern side of the single-storey wing and would project out a little over 2.5 metres. It would have a shallow sloping mono-pitch roof that would link to the pitched roof of the existing building in a form similar to a cat-slide roof, and it would have brick walls to match the existing.

Policy SDC1 of the LP indicates that development should demonstrate high quality, inclusive and sustainable design, and that new development will only be supported where the proposals are of scale, density and design that responds to the character of the area in which they are situated. The Council’s Climate Change & [name] & [name] indicates that the council will consider, when assessing an extension, the effect of the proposal on the scale and character of the existing building and the surrounding area.

The Council contends that the proposed extension would be an incongruous form of development by virtue of its siting and design, which would make it sit uncomfortably against the existing dwellinghouse. In addition, approving such an extension would erode the unified character and appearance of the immediate area to its detriment.

In this case, the group of buildings is set well back from the surrounding roads and is not readily visible from outside of the site. There is a tall mature hedge around the northern and western boundaries of the appeal property, and views of the courtyard and the adjoining dwelling are largely screened by the hedge, a central stables building, and buildings associated with the neighbouring dwelling of [address].

The council contends that the surrounding hedge should be considered as potentially only a temporary feature. However, it would seem highly unlikely that there would not be an appropriate boundary around the property to provide adequate privacy. In any case, the topography of the site is such that the extension would be seen only as a low feature in matching materials and with a sympathetic sloping roof that would be set well below the main ridge level of the existing single-storey wing. It would not appear prominent, incongruous in its context, or significantly different from a lean-to extension on an agricultural, barn-type building.

The proposed extension would be sited on the opposite side of the wing from the courtyard and would have no visual impact on the courtyard. There is, therefore, no external point from which the extension could be seen to disrupt or unbalance the architectural form of the group of buildings around the courtyard itself. By virtue of the matching materials and design, and its limited scale, I consider that it would not be harmful to the character or appearance of the host property, or of the unified, wider context of the buildings around the courtyard. On this basis, the proposal would not conflict with Policies GP2 and SDC1 of the LP, or with the SPD. Accordingly, I allow the appeal.

I have attached a condition relating to plans because it is necessary that the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. I have attached a further condition relating to materials in the interests of the visual amenities of the area.