Appeal 3350469

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for “Proposed single storey extensions comprising new en-suite bedroom, garden room and relocated porch”, at [site address] , [site address] , [site address] , Clanfield, Oxfordshire [postcode] , in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 24/01210/HHD, and subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin no 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: A-101 [name], A-201, A-001 and A-002.

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.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 as amended (or any order revoking or re-enacting that order), no development permitted by virtue of [name], C and D of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order shall be undertaken.

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.

A new version of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published in December 2024. [name] have had regard to the revised national policy as a material consideration, planning decisions must still be made in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance, the issues most relevant to the appeal remain unaffected by the revisions to the Framework. I am therefore satisfied that there is Appeal Planning Officer APP/D3125/D/24/3350469 no requirement to seek further submissions on the revised Framework, and that no party would be disadvantaged by such a course of action.

The main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the host property.

[site address] is a former agricultural building that was once part of a larger farmstead before being converted into a single residential dwelling. The surrounding cluster of former farm buildings, now primarily in residential use, retains a strong rural and vernacular character. Set within open agricultural fields, the [site address] complex maintains a clear connection to its agricultural past notably through its layout, materials, and overall setting.

Some elements of the appeal building’s historic agricultural character have been lost due to its conversion to residential use and subsequent alterations. Nevertheless, and despite being now an L-shaped property, elements of its original linear form remain visible. This, together with its existing appearance, isolated setting and clear historical association with [site address] collectively preserve the building’s overall rural character.

The proposed infill extension, though significantly larger than the existing porch, would remain subservient to the main building in terms of height and width and would be finished with materials that match those of the existing property. While its positioning would obscure the existing 90-degree corner of the structure, the building's overall length and proportions, even taking into account the proposed extension of the southern-facing wing, would remain much larger than the proposed infill development. Consequently, this would ensure that the historic linear form of [site address] remains clearly perceptible as a defining feature of the property, even when considering previously approved alterations and extensions.

The Council have submitted a copy of an appeal at nearby [name] from 2009, with the inference being it sets a precedent for this appeal to be dismissed. However, I do not have the full details of this particular scheme, such as the plans and the development policies in place at that time. As a result, I cannot be certain that the circumstances of that appeal are directly comparable to the proposal before me.

No concerns were raised by the Council regarding the proposed extension which would provide an additional bedroom. Based on my site observations and assessment of the evidence, I find no reason to disagree with this conclusion, as the scale of the extension would remain sympathetic to the host building, and simply reflect its form and design.

For the above reasons, the proposal would not be harmful to the character and appearance of the host property and would accord with Policies OS2, OS4, H6 and EH12 of the West Oxfordshire Local Plan (2018), Chapter 14 of the [name] (2016) and section 12 of the Framework. Amongst other things, these seek to ensure that development respects the intrinsic character of the area, conserves buildings and features of historic significance, and prevents extensions to traditional buildings from obscuring or compromising the form or Appeal Planning Officer APP/D3125/D/24/3350469 character of the original structure. Additionally, they emphasise that the scale, form, and character of the original property should be sympathetically reflected in any new development.

In addition to the standard time limit for commencement of the development, I have attached a condition requiring the development to accord with the approved plans. These conditions are necessary in the interests of expediency and certainty, respectively. To preserve the character and appearance of the host dwelling and the surrounding area, I have added a condition requiring the use of materials to match those of the existing dwelling.

I have also recommended a condition restricting specific permitted development rights for [site address] to preserve its existing character. Given that the building has already undergone alterations, further extensions or roof modifications could diminish its character. Therefore, restrictions on [name], C and D permitted development rights are necessary to preserve the building’s agricultural character and its relationship with the surrounding rural setting.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s recommendation and on that basis the appeal is allowed.