Extension and alterations, including a new balcony to the east, external steps to the west, solar panels on the outbuilding, and a ground source heat pump

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 6 July 2026 by E Clifford BA (Hons) MA Decision by M Russell BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 11 September 2026 Appeal Ref: 6009388 Thorn Lodge, Almshouses Cattle Grid to Brownhill Lane, Wembury, Devon PL9 0EF • 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 & Mrs Gibson against the decision of South Hams District Council. • The application Ref is 2315/25/HHO. • The development proposed is extension and alterations, including a new balcony to the east, external steps to the west, solar panels on the outbuilding, and a ground source heat pump . Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Appeal Procedure 2. The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal. Preliminary Matters 3. A new National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published in August 2026. With regards to the main issue, the relevant policies are not materially different from the previous Framework. Whilst there are some changes in regard to heritage matters, the actions where harm is identified to designated and non-designated heritage assets are not materially different to the previous iteration of the Framework. I am therefore satisfied that I can proceed without further consultation with the main parties since, with the above in mind, their respective cases would not be prejudiced. 4. As part of the appeal submission, I have been provided with revised drawings showing the proposed extension finished in stonework rather than the originally proposed brick. This is a substantive change, and I am unaware of any formal consultation taking place on these drawings. Accepting the alternative options for consideration as part of this appeal therefore has the potential to prejudice the Council or other interested parties from an opportunity to comment. Having regard to Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin) and in the interests of procedural fairness, I have therefore made my recommendation on the basis of the same plans that the Council determined the planning application which led to this appeal. In doing so, this does not preclude the appellant from submitting an alternative scheme to the Council by way of a further planning application should they wish to do so. Appeal Decision 6009388 2 Main Issue 5. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area and host dwelling, including whether it would preserve and enhance the natural beauty of the South Devon National Landscape (NL) and Heritage Coast. Reasons for the Recommendation 6. Thorn Lodge is a modest two-storey dwelling bound to the highway by a stone wall and stone gate piers topped with a ball finial. The evidence before me indicates that it was historically the gatehouse to Thorn House (formerly known as ‘South Wembury House’). The natural topography means that the ground levels significantly drop away from the road level and the ground floor level is partially subterranean. The host dwelling has an L-plan form with a hipped roof form and tall chimney stacks. It is built of rubble stone to the lower level, with the upper floor rendered, and has a prevalence of windows with leaded detailing, arched red brick detailing to the ground floor windows and door lintels. The materials used are reflective of the wider character of the locality, where rubble stonework is a typical feature. Collectively, these features give the appeal dwelling a distinct vernacular character, reflective of the wider locality which together with its historic use warrants non-designated heritage asset (NDHA) status. 7. The NL is noted for its rolling hills and wooded valleys which characterise the area surrounding the appeal site, and more widely, by rugged cliffs, sandy coves and undeveloped coastline. From my own observations, the NL is also characterised by its intricate network of winding lanes and paths, and the regular use of slate for roofs, and painted render or stone in its vernacular dwellings. The appeal site is also within the South Devon Heritage Coast area, an additional local definition afforded in order to conserve, protect and enhance the natural beauty of the landscape and coast and which shares many characteristics with the NL, particularly the high-quality vernacular buildings, and generally open views. From around the appeal site, there are extensive views across the NL, which in this area is defined by its overriding open and rural character. 8. The Plymouth & South West Devon Joint Local Plan Supplementary Planning Document (2020) (SPD) states that “extensions and alterations should relate well to the main dwelling and character of the area” and further elaborates that “even where materials or designs contrast there should still be a harmonious relationship with the main body of the property being extended”. 9. The ‘north’ and ‘west’ facing elevations, as identified on the drawings, are particularly prominent in public views within the NL on the approach to the site along the public highway. They include the main entrance door from the road and clearly display the building’s split-level design. Together with the vernacular features described above, they are integral to the modest gatehouse character, as well as the building’s relationship with the topography, positively contributing to the significance of the NDHA and to the natural beauty of the NL. The existing ‘north’ elevation would be substantively obscured, with the proposed extensions introducing an uncharacteristic range of symmetrical appearance. The ‘west’ elevation would read more as a single storey dwelling, diminishing the relationship of the building with the NL’s topography. Appeal Decision 6009388 3 10. Moreover, the extension would result in the loss of key features, including the stonework and leaded windows, also incorporating large windows and a balcony of an overtly contemporary aesthetic both of which would be very prominent on the ‘north elevation’. Even though the proposed use of brick is limited to the partially subterranean level of the dwelling, the topography of the area means that this would still be highly visible in views from the road. 11. As a result, and even accounting for the provision of ridgelines and eaves below the existing, the detailing and scale of the proposals would compete with and undermine the legibility of the NDHA as a modest gatehouse, resulting in harm to its significance. It would also draw undue prominence to the dwelling, detracting from the vernacular of the NL and appear at odds with the overarching character of the Heritage Coast. A condition requiring the use of stonework would not overcome my wider design concerns. 12. In accordance with the Framework, I am required to consider the effect on the significance of the NDHA against the benefits of the proposal and to make a balanced judgement having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the asset. 13. I am also conscious of my duty under Section 245 of the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023 to seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of the NL. The Framework also requires that substantial weight to be given to conserving and enhancing the beauty of the NL. For the reasons given above, the proposed development would not conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the NL. 14. The appellants have referenced Policy TTV29 of the Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan 2014-2034 (2019) (JLP) which acknowledges the financial preference of extending a home rather than moving house and also that site specific considerations may allow extensions seeking to increase the internal floorspace of the original dwelling house by more than 50%, as the proposed development does. I am also mindful that the appellant has family locally and ties to the area. However, the scheme does not demonstrate an uplift in the quality of the built form, as required by TTV29, as it would result in harm to the significance of the NDHA and the natural beauty of the NL, and in turn the character of the Heritage Coast. 15. The appellant has drawn my attention to the Nationally Described Space Standards (NDSS) for two-bedroom properties, suggesting that the current dimensions do not adhere to these standards. I acknowledge that increased floorspace and separate bedrooms for the family’s children has the potential to be beneficial to living conditions, albeit there is nothing to suggest the design of the proposed development is the only way to increase floorspace. Furthermore, the NDSS refers to new housing and is not intended to be applied retrospectively. I accept the proposals have the potential to improve the thermal efficiency of a single dwelling. 16. Notwithstanding the above considerations, in the circumstances and applying a balanced judgement, there are not public benefits before me of sufficient weight to overcome the identified harm to the NDHA. 17. Taking all of the above into account, the proposed development would have a harmful effect on the character and appearance of the area and host dwelling, a NDHA, and would also fail to conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the NL Appeal Decision 6009388 4 and Heritage Coast. In those respects, it would conflict with Policies TTV29, DEV20, DEV21, DEV23, DEV24 and DEV25 of the JLP which require development to not be significantly larger than the volume of the original dwelling, to have proper regard to the existing pattern of development including but not limited to local distinctness, materials and historic value and uplifting the quality of built form, and that only development which positively contributes to the character of the Heritage Coast should be permitted. For the reasons set out, the proposal would also not align with the heritage and National Landscapes requirements of the Framework. Conclusion and Recommendation 18. There is no dispute that the appeal site is located in the countryside. The benefits of the proposed extensions would be substantially outweighed by the adverse effects identified to the NDHA, the NL and the Heritage Coast when assessed against the JLP and the national decision-making policies in the Framework. Therefore, for the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed. E Clifford APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER Inspector’s Decision 19. I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is dismissed. M Russell INSPECTOR