Extension to existing detached garage to provide additional garage with store over

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 5 June 2024 by Mrs Chris Pipe BA(Hons), DipTP, MTP, MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 26th June 2024 Appeal Ref: APP/B3410/D/24/3337222 Weavers Lake Cottage Farm, Back Lane, Hadley End, Yoxall, Burton-on- Trent, Staffordshire DE13 8PF • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr. Paul Boulton against the decision of East Staffordshire Borough Council. • The application Ref is P/2023/00829. • The development proposed is extension to existing detached garage to provide additional garage with store over. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Procedural Matter 2. Since the determination of the application the National Planning Policy Framework has been superseded by the National Planning Policy Framework (2023) (the Framework). However, in relation to this appeal the aims of both sets of policies are similar. No party would be prejudiced or caused any injustice by me proceeding with the appeal in light of this change in policy. Main Issue 3. The main issue in this appeal is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area in general. Reasons 4. The appeal site is generous in size, a large farmhouse lies close to the proposed development, along with detached stables. I understand that the existing garage/store with study and store on the first floor was a replacement building for a coach house. The appeal site lies within the countryside and has a rural aesthetic. 5. The materials proposed are sympathetic to the existing building, and the lower roof eaves and ridge provides a subservient form of development. Nevertheless, the proposed elongated outbuilding is situated in an elevated position adjacent to the highway. Whilst screened to a degree the proposed extension to the garage would be an imposing form of development in the rural area. Appeal Decision APP/B3410/D/24/3337222 2 6. Whilst the proposed development would, in general, adhere to the East Staffordshire Design Guide, Supplementary Planning Document (2008) (the SPD) which seeks to ensure extensions to existing buildings are subservient with matching materials. The SPD is clear that the purpose of the document is to promote high quality design. I find that the proposed development would conflict with the overarching aim of SPD as the design would be a dominant feature within the countryside location. 7. I find that the proposed development would harm the character and appearance of the area in general. 8. There is conflict with Policies SP1, SP8, SP24, DP1 and DP3 of the East Staffordshire Borough Council, Local Plan, Planning for Change 2012-2031 (2015) which seek amongst other things for developments to be high quality, responding positively to the context of the surrounding area. 9. There is conflict with the Framework which seeks to ensure developments are of good design. Conclusion 10. For the above reasons I conclude that this appeal should be dismissed. C Pipe INSPECTOR