As described on the application form as ‘Proposed porch extension

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 24 February 2026 by Andrew Fuller BSc (Hons), Dip TP, MA, RTPI, IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 10th March 2026 Appeal Ref: 6001672 Birdlip View, Cirencester Road, Birdlip, Gloucestershire GL4 8JL • 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 Anna Cole & William Davis against the decision of Cotswold District Council. • The application Ref is 25/01791/FUL. • The development proposed is as described on the application form as ‘Proposed porch extension’. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the proposed porch extension at Birdlip View, Cirencester Road, Birdlip, Gloucestershire GL4 8JL in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 25/01791/FUL, subject to the following conditions: 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 25.881/1.02 Rev A Proposed site layout; 25.881/1.03 Rev A Existing and proposed ground floor plans; 25.881/1.04 Existing and proposed elevations; and location plan. 3) No development above ground level shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved samples. Preliminary Matters 2. There is a discrepancy on the application form in respect of the appellant’s name. In their appeal statement, the appellant has confirmed that the applicant’s name on the application form was entered incorrectly. Accordingly, in the interests of accuracy, I have used the names given as part of the appeal documentation in the banner heading Main Issue 3. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and surrounding area, including the Cotswolds National Landscape. Appeal Decision 6001672 2 Reasons 4. The appeal site comprises a dwelling in a rural location, surrounded by a small number of other nearby properties. These neighbouring houses are of different sizes, ages and orientations to the road, often with porch entrances. Birdlip View is positioned sideways with its blank flank gable towards the road, which it is separated from by a grass verge. It is constructed from local Cotswold stone, both in its walls and roof. 5. The site lies within the Cotswolds National Landscape (CNL) where there is a statutory duty on decision-makers to seek to further the purposes of designation. The primary purpose in respect of the CNL is to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the designated area 6. The site comprises a traditional house, typical of its countryside location, set within a large garden plot. The site contributes positively to the CNL through its overall form, the use of traditional materials and grouping with other sporadic buildings at the foot of this semi-open incline. The site also contains numerous mature trees and landscaping which positively contributes to the verdant, rural character within the immediately surrounding area and the qualities of the NL. 7. The proposed porch would be of a traditional design and would be positioned on the flank elevation that fronts the public highway. It would have timber elevations and a stone roof which would be highly visible on the approach from both directions along the road. Nonetheless, by reason of its relatively limited scale, its contained position towards the road and other built form, and the use of complimentary materials, the proposed development would form a modest addition to the appeal property 8. In making my decision, I have had regard to the Council’s Design Code in the Cotswold District Local Plan (2018) (the Local Plan). It requires porches not to detract from the character of a building, or obscure features of interest. This blank gable, despite being typical in some forms of rural vernacular, has been repeatedly altered over time with changes and scarring visible in the stonework. To this end, despite the porch being positioned, part over the original house and part over the rear extension, it would not detract from this elevation or its detailing. Accordingly, the proposed development would not harm the character or appearance of the host property or surrounding area, and would leave the natural beauty of the CNL unharmed 9. The Council has argued that timber is an inappropriate finish to the porch and should instead be clad in local Cotswold stone. However, I noted on site a mix of timber and stone used in the execution of porches on other nearby properties. Moreover, the roof of the appeal structure is proposed to be covered in Cotswold stone, and this will ensure a strong visual link is made with the appearance of the host property, thereby mitigating any harm with regards to the character of this house. 10. Overall, I conclude that the proposed development would not harm the character or appearance of the existing dwelling or surrounding area, including the CNL. As such, I find no conflict with Policies EN1, EN2, EN4 and EN5 of the Cotswold District Local Plan (2018). These policies, in summary, require development to be of a design quality that respects the character and distinctive appearance of the Appeal Decision 6001672 3 locality as well as conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the protected landscape. Other Matters 11. The land on which the porch is proposed, whilst owned by the applicant, has rights of access by the Highway Authority for maintenance as part of the highway. The Highways Authority requires the appellant to seek a stopping up order under Section 247 or Section 253 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. This was also a matter of concern for the Parish Council. However, the resolution of this matter does not weigh for or against the appeal and does not alter my conclusion on the main issue. Conditions 12. In addition to the standard time condition, I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out following the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of certainty. 13. A condition is necessary requiring samples of materials in order to integrate the appearance of the proposed porch with that of the original building, in the interests of character and appearance generally. 14. In imposing conditions, I have had regard to the tests within the National Planning Policy Framework, the Planning Practice Guidance, and relevant statute. Conclusion 15. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed. Andrew Fuller INSPECTOR