Construction of standalone barn with ground floor storage and parking and accommodation at first floor level, use ancillary to main house

Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 9 March 2021 by I A Dyer BSc (Eng) FCIHT an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 24 March 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/Y2620/D/20/3266003 Marsh Cottage, Pockthorpe Loke, Hickling NR12 0BX • 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 S Lambard against the decision of North Norfolk District Council. • The application Ref PF/20/1230, dated 23 July 2020, was refused by notice dated 13 November 2020. The development proposed is construction of standalone barn with ground floor storage and parking and accommodation at first floor level, use ancillary to main house. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. Subsequent to the appellant lodging his appeal a decision has been issued with regard to another appeal1 at the same address. The parties have had the opportunity to provide comments on any implications that they consider that decision has in regard to the case before me. 3. Concerns have been raised regarding the scale and appearance of the proposed building, which would be comparable to that of a small dwelling. Notwithstanding that the accommodation is self-contained, the proposal would share a means of access and services with the main dwelling and it is stated that future occupiers would be the existing occupiers of Marsh Cottage during the renovation of the host dwelling and, subsequently, their relatives. The proposal before me described is as a garage, with living accommodation above: an outbuilding ancillary to the main dwelling. I have determined this appeal on the basis of that description of the proposal. 4. If the structure is not built or used as proposed, or if there is a material change of use in the future to create a separate dwelling, including use as a holiday let, then a separate grant of planning permission would be required, and the building would be at risk of enforcement action if such permission is not granted. Main Issues 5. In view of the above the main issue is the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area. 1 PINS Ref: APP/Y2620/D/20/3259782 Appeal Decision APP/Y2620/D/20/3266003 2 Reasons 6. The appeal site fronts onto Pockthorpe Loke, an unmetalled cul-de-sac lane running off Stubb Road. It comprises a large meadow with some trees and contains a dwelling known as Marsh Cottage. 7. The site is situated in open countryside, with only sporadic development in the immediate vicinity. Marsh Cottage occupies the eastern corner of the site, close to the north-eastern end of Pockthorpe Loke. Nearby on Pockthorpe Loke are three dwellings, Plummers Farm Barn, Plummers Cottage and The Cottage. Plummers Cottage has modest single storey outbuildings within its plot. Plummers Cottage and The Cottage are small cottages of tradition, rustic appearance. Plummers Farm Barn is a more substantial building resultant from a barn conversion and has a large outbuilding. 8. The host dwelling, Marsh Cottage, is oriented with its principal façade towards Stubb Road, rather than Pockthorpe Loke and is, in the main part, a two-storey brick and flint cottage with a two storey red brick side extension. Additionally a single storey side extension projects from its south-eastern gable to within a short distance of Pockthorpe Loke. The two storey elements are currently thatched. However, in 2018, planning permission2 was granted for the replacement of the thatch roof covering with pantiles, which is extant and could still be implemented. Notwithstanding the addition of the extensions, the appearance of Marsh Cottage remains that of a moderately-sized dwelling in a rural setting. 9. The Draft North Norfolk District Council Landscape Character Assessment - 2018- identifies that enlargement of properties and increasing massing of buildings is having an adverse effect on the Settled Farmland Character Type. The area around the site has the character of settled farmland and Marsh Cottage is a dwelling of rustic appearance lying within an extensive plot within a small, loose cluster of dwellings typical of such landscape. 10. The proposal would introduce a substantial new building on the site of 1½ storeys and a total footprint similar to that of Marsh Cottage, in close proximity to the existing dwelling, between the dwelling and Stubb Road. The building would be constructed in materials to reflect those of Marsh Cottage, with the roof being pantiled to reflect the proposed roof of the main dwelling. 11. There is little substantive evidence before me upon which to determine the extent or scale of Marsh Cottage or other buildings within the site in the past and so I have determined this appeal in regard to the built form as I observed it during my site visit. 12. The wall of the proposal closest to Pockthorpe Loke would be roughly in line with the end of the single storey extension of Marsh Cottage. However, it would appear in front of the principal façade of Marsh Cottage, that which faces Stubb Road. The proposed building, by virtue of its scale would, even in regard to the scale of Marsh Cottage as it now stands, having been extended, be disproportionate to the main dwelling. Notwithstanding screening provided by existing planting and buildings, the proposal, and its relationship to Marsh Cottage, would be visible from Pockthorpe Loke and Stubb Road. 2 Council Ref: PF/18/2292 Appeal Decision APP/Y2620/D/20/3266003 3 13. By virtue of its position and scale the proposed building would appear dominant in views approaching Marsh Cottage along Pockthorpe Loke from Stubb Road and create an incongruous relationship with the host dwelling. In this context, this incongruity, which would be readily apparent to anyone approaching Marsh Cottage from Stubb Road, and from the wider countryside to the south-east, would amount to significant harm to the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area. 14. The appellant has pointed out that the site is large enough to accommodate the building and that the materials would reflect those used in Marsh Cottage, as it would be altered by the extant planning permission, nor would they be at odds with the existing thatched roof. However, this does not justify the harm to the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area resultant from the incongruous relationship of the proposal with the main dwelling in regard to their comparative sizes and positions which I have identified above. 15. I therefore conclude that the proposal would result in significant harm to the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area. It would, therefore, be contrary to the aims of Policies HO8, EN2 and EN4 of the North Norfolk Local Development Framework Core Strategy -2008- (the Core Strategy) in as much as these seek to ensure that development respects the character and distinctiveness of the surrounding area, ensuring that the scale and massing of buildings relate sympathetically to the surrounding area and that house extensions in the countryside do not result in a disproportionately large increase in the height or scale of the original dwelling, or materially increase the impact of the dwelling on the appearance of the surrounding countryside. 16. For similar reasons the proposal would be contrary to those parts of the National Planning Policy Framework -2019- (the Framework) which seek to achieve well-designed places and conserve and enhance the natural environment. 17. Further, it would be contrary to the aims of paragraphs 3.5.1 to 3.5.4 of the North Norfolk Local Development Framework Design Guide -2008- in as much as the proposed building would have an awkward and incongruous relation to the main dwelling. 18. However, the proposed building would be ancillary to Marsh Cottage and the proposal would not create a new dwelling. Therefore Policy SS1 of the Core Strategy is not relevant to this appeal, whilst Policy SS2 of the Core Strategy allows extensions to existing dwellings in the countryside and so there is no conflict with that policy. Other Matters 19. The Core Strategy pre-dates the Framework and so policies within it should be assessed and given weight in terms of their consistency with the aims of the Framework. 20. The Framework recognises the importance of development being sympathetic to local character, including landscape setting, and of recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. 21. The policies in the Core Strategy that are most important in this case (Policies HO8, EN2 and EN4 of the Core Strategy) are broadly consistent with the aims Appeal Decision APP/Y2620/D/20/3266003 4 and policies set out in Sections 12 and 15 of the Framework and, therefore, are not out-of-date. 22. The development would provide private benefits in terms of delivering additional living accommodation and improving facilities for garaging vehicles and storage on the site for the benefit of the occupiers and these benefits would result from works within an existing residential site. Further, it would allow the occupiers to remain on-site whilst Marsh Cottage is renovated. However there may be other options that would achieve this without the need for a permanent building of the scale proposed. 23. There would be minor public benefits to the local economy in terms of short term employment in the construction industry. I am aware that the scheme is supported by some local residents, including a former owner of the property. Taken together, given the scale of the proposal, these benefits carry limited weight. 24. The appellant has drawn attention to a number of other developments in the area for which planning permissions have been granted, including properties in the area with large outbuildings. However, based on the evidence provided, the outbuildings referred to appear to be associated with comparatively larger dwellings than Marsh Cottage. The outbuilding at Plummers Farm Barn lies to the rear of the dwelling when approaching along Pockthorpe Loke and so does not dominate the view on the approach and appears behind and subsidiary to Plummers Farm Barn in longer views from Stubb Road. 25. Whilst I do not know the full circumstances of the other developments referred to, I have little evidence to demonstrate that they are directly comparable in context to the proposal before me, which would involve a disproportionately large increase in built form between the principle façade of the main dwelling and the main road. In any event, I have considered the proposal primarily on its own merits. I therefore give limited weight to the examples of development elsewhere. 26. However, the harm from the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the site and the surrounding area would be a significant factor weighing against the scheme. 27. Whilst the proposal may affect the value of the property and result in an increase in the appropriate level of Council Tax, and payments may be required to fulfil obligations under the Community Infrastructure Levy, there is no evidence before me to demonstrate that this will be the case and so I have attached no weight to this matter. 28. In conclusion the limited benefits provided by the proposal would be outweighed by the identified harm when considered against development plan policies and the Framework when read as a whole. Appeal Decision APP/Y2620/D/20/3266003 5 Conclusion 29. The proposed development would be contrary to the development plan and there are no other considerations which outweigh this finding. Accordingly, for the reasons given, the appeal is dismissed. I Dyer INSPECTOR