Single storey front extension to form a porch and single and 2 storey side and rear extensions with associated internal alterations and alterations to external finishes

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 27 April 2026 by Les Greenwood MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 08 May 2026 Appeal Ref: 6006472 Colgro Farm, Channels End, Colmworth, Bedford MK44 2NS • 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 and Mrs Martin against the decision of Bedford Borough Council. • The application Ref is 25/02162/FUL. • The development proposed is a single storey front extension to form a porch and single and 2 storey side and rear extensions with associated internal alterations and alterations to external finishes. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for a single storey front extension to form a porch and single and 2 storey side and rear extensions with associated internal alterations and alterations to external finishes at Colgro Farm, Channels End, Colmworth, Bedford MK44 2NS in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/02162/FUL, 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: JJ25-001-001G and JJ25-001-003A. 3) No development above base course level shall take place until full particulars of the external materials to be used in the extensions (to include walls, roof, doors, windows and external gutters and pipework) have been provided for inspection (on site where possible) and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved particulars. Main Issues 2. The main issues are the effects of the proposal on: i) The effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the house and the local area; and ii) The effect of the proposal on the significance of heritage assets, with particular reference to the setting of a grade II listed granary building. Reasons Character and appearance 3. Channels End is a small settlement with a varied range of traditional houses and farm buildings dispersed along a rural lane. Colgro Farm is a much altered late Appeal Decision 6006472 2 19th Century house set well back from the street within a former farmyard. At present a blank 2 storey brick side wall and a flat roofed extension face the street. The proposal would substantially change this side of the building, adding a twin gable 2 storey extension and a first floor extension, finished in a mix of brick, black timber cladding, stone and slate, with large gazed openings. A front porch is also proposed. 4. The Council is concerned that the proposed extensions would overwhelm the modest proportions of the existing dwelling and result in an incoherent and suburbanised form out of keeping with the simple agricultural character of the site. The existing building is, however, acknowledged to be of limited historic value. Alterations including flat roofed extensions and modern concrete roofing tiles have resulted in an unattractive, fairly low quality structure that detracts from its rural setting. 5. The proposed design would enliven the building, using traditional forms and good quality materials to enhance the overall design and create a more coherent form. A pitched roof would be added over the prominent flat roofed rear extension, and the modern concrete tiles would be replaced with slates. While the large areas of glazing would be a modern feature, they would fit reasonably well within the overall design. The new façade facing the street would be a distinct improvement over the blank 2 storey wall and flat roofed extension. The proposed extensions would not be over-large and would remain reasonably proportionate to the original building. 6. I conclude that the proposal would enhance the character of the building and the local area. It accords in this respect with policies 7S, 28S, 29, 30 and 66 of the Bedford Borough Local Plan 2030 (LP), the Council’s Residential Extensions, New Dwellings and Small Infill Developments design guidance and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), which taken together aim to secure high quality design that promotes local distinctiveness and complements local character. Heritage assets 7. Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990 requires that special regard be given to the desirability of preserving listed buildings, their setting and any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess. The listed granary is an 18th Century farm building with timber framing, brick infill and a steeply pitched corrugated iron roof. It is in poor condition but remains of high significance as part of the area’s agricultural history. 8. The granary stands away from the farmhouse, across the yard. Even though the proposal would bring the house a few metres closer, a wide gap would remain, so that the house would not crowd the granary or detract from its visual perception. As above, I take the view that the proposal would enhance the character of the house and local area. Given the amount of physical and visual separation that would be maintained, I see no reason why it should diminish the heritage significance of the granary. 9. The site is not in a conservation area, and no reference has been made to any other listed buildings nearby. I conclude that the proposal would not harm the setting of the nearby listed granary or the significance of any other heritage asset. It Appeal Decision 6006472 3 accords in this respect with LP policies 28S, 29 and 41S and Section 16 of the Framework, which aim to conserve and where possible enhance heritage assets. Conditions 10. I impose a condition specifying the relevant plans to provide certainty. Approval of external materials is also necessary, to protect local character and the setting of the listed building. Conclusion 11. I find that the proposal accords with the development plan. For the reasons set out above, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that the appeal should succeed. Les Greenwood INSPECTOR