Garden room extension to west elevation with glazed veranda

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 4 April 2018 by Penelope Metcalfe BA(Hons) MSc DipUP DipDBE MRTPI IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 18th April 2018 Appeal Ref: APP/K0425/D/18/3192733 Kimsale House, Brookside Lane, Little Kimble, HP17 0UF  The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission.  The appeal is made by Mr and Mrs R Clark against the decision of Wycombe District Council.  The application Ref 17/07354/FUL, dated 29 August 2017, was refused by notice dated 23 November 2017.  The development proposed is garden room extension to west elevation with glazed veranda. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for garden room extension to west elevation with glazed verandah at Kimsale House, Brookside Lane, Little Kimble, HP17 0UF in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 17/07354/FUL, dated 29 August 2017, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 1:1250 location plan, 0262.01, 0262.08 and 0262.09. 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those of the existing building. Main issues 2. I consider that the main issues in this case are a) whether the proposal constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt, b) if it is inappropriate development, its effect on the openness of the Green Belt, c) its effect on the character and appearance of the area, and d) whether the harm by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations, so as to amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify the development. Reasons 3. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) sets out several categories of new buildings which are not inappropriate development in the Appeal Decision APP/K0425/D/18/3192733 2 Green Belt. It allows for the extension or alteration of an existing building provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building. It states that the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and permanence. 4. The Council refers to local plan policies contained in the Wycombe District Local Plan to 2011 (the 2004 local plan). This was adopted in 2004, saved and extended in 2007 and subsequently replaced by the adopted Core Strategy in 2008 (the core strategy) and the adopted Delivery and Site Allocations Plan 2013. Policies GB2 and GB6 of the local plan and CS9 of the core strategy relate to development in the Green Belt. Policy CS9 states that the Green Belt will be protected from inappropriate development as defined in Government policy. Policy GB6 relates to residential extensions and sets out restrictive criteria including control over the increase in floor area. It is more prescriptive than CS9 in terms of the size of the extensions allowed. 5. These polices pre-date the Framework and are based on guidance in PPG2 Green Belts which the Framework superseded. They carry weight insofar as they are consistent with the Framework. The latter does not provide any direction as to what may be regarded as a disproportionate addition, nor does it indicate how this should be measured, for example, by floor space or volume. This allows for a less prescriptive approach to assessing residential extensions than that taken by the local plan which, in my view, is appropriate in this case. 6. The Council also refers to policies DM42 and DM43 of the Local Plan – Regulation 19 Version of 2017 (the 2017 local plan). Policy DM43 sets out criteria for residential extensions in the Green Belt which include reference to an acceptable increase in volume over that of the original building. 7. The appeal property is a substantial detached two storey house located at the end of an unmade track, Brookside Lane. It is surrounded by an open rural landscape, and is one of a small number of large residential properties scattered along the lane. It occupies a large plot and is within the Green Belt and the Chilterns AONB. 8. The proposal is for a garden room and verandah. The garden room would replace an existing open porch with pitched roof with an enclosed room which would be larger in floor area, but of a similar height, also with a pitched roof and glazed doors. The verandah would be either side of the new room and open with a glazed roof. 9. The house has previously had a two storey extension which the Council calculates to have increased the floor area of the house by 56.4% over the original. The Council and the appellants disagree over the calculation of the increase in floor area which would result from the appeal proposal. The Council includes the open verandah and calculates the cumulative increase in floor area to be 73.6%. It does not put forward any calculations based on the volume of the existing house. The appellants argue that the floor area should be calculated on the basis of the enclosed room only. This would result in an increase of approximately 8.8sqm, a cumulative increase of 64% over the original. 10. In my opinion, the proposal should be considered on the basis of the enclosed room only. The verandah would not be enclosed and so would not result in an increase in habitable floor space. It would be a lightweight, open-sided Appeal Decision APP/K0425/D/18/3192733 3 structure with a glazed roof attached to the west elevation, at what is, in effect, the rear of the building in terms of its orientation to the lane. 11. I consider that the garden room would be very modest in size, not only in terms of its floor area, but also insofar as it would not add significantly to the overall volume of the house. It would reflect the style and materials of the existing porch and other features of the house and integrate well with it. The plot is large enough to accommodate it and it would not be visible from public viewpoints. I consider that it would not be a disproportionate addition to the dwelling either in its own right or in terms of its cumulative effect taken with the previous extensions. It would not have an adverse impact on the openness, rural character and visual amenity of the Green Belt, nor would it compromise any of the purposes of the Green Belt set out in the Framework. 12. I conclude that the proposal is not inappropriate development and in this respect it would be consistent with the Framework. 13. The proposal would be in keeping with the scale and character of the existing house and constructed in materials to match. I conclude that it would not harm the character and appearance of the building itself or the surrounding area in the AONB and that it would be in accordance with policy L1 of the 2004 local plan and DM30 of the 2017 local plan which relate to development in the AONB. 14. For the reasons given above, the appeal is allowed. Conditions 15. I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council, having regard to the tests set out in the Framework. A condition detailing the plans is necessary to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and for the avoidance of doubt. A condition relating to the materials is necessary in order to ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development. PAG Metcalfe INSPECTOR