Case 3273478

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE

Gloucester City Council — appeal dismissed

Outcome
Dismissed
Decision date
8 September 2021
Authority
Gloucester City Council
Inspector
Law T
Procedure
Written Representations
Casework type
Planning Appeal
Type detail
Planning Appeals - Full
Development type
Other minor developments
Appellant
MR B Guo
Agent
Thomas Dean Architects Ltd
LPA reference
20/01261/FUL
ONS LPA code
E07000081
Jurisdiction
Transferred
Link status
Not Linked
Start date
10 June 2021

Summary AI

The appeal for a new annexe to 20 Barnfields in Gloucester was dismissed due to its impact on the character and appearance of the area and its potential to harm the living conditions of neighbours. The proposed development was deemed to be too dominant and would introduce a discordant built form to the locality.

Generated from the decision letter — check against the original before relying on it.

PDF text

Page 1 · Chunk 0 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision Site Visit made on 10 August 2021 by Tamsin Law BSc MSc MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 08 September 2021 Appeal Ref: APP/U1620/W/21/3273478 20 Barnfields, Gloucester GL4 6WE • 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 B Guo against the decision of Gloucester City Council. • The application Ref 20/01261/FUL, dated 7 December 2020, was refused by notice dated 18 February 2021. • The development proposed is proposed alterations and extensions to existing garage to form new annexe to No 20 Barnfields, Gloucester. Decision 1. The appeal is dismissed. Preliminary Matters 2. A revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) was published on 20 July 2021. The content of the revised Framework has been considered but in light of the facts in this case it does not alter my conclusion. Main Issues 3. The main issues are the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area; and whether or not it would impact the living conditions of the occupiers of No 22 Barnfields. Reasons Character and Appearance 4.

Page 1 · Chunk 1 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision The appeal site is the left hand property of a pair of two storey semi-detached dwellings. This building is typical of the development in the surrounding street scene which is generally characterised by evenly spaced pairs of semi-detached dwellings and short terraced rows. The appeal site however is unique in that it is tucked into the corner of a cul-de-sac and is not readily visible when travelling along the adjacent highway. Gaps between the dwellings together with their set back from the highway gives the area an open character. A single storey garage sits prominently to the front of the host dwelling and is readily visible in the street scene due to its location and elevated position relative to the highway. 5. Garages and outbuildings have been constructed in the gaps between the dwellings, however they are single storey in nature and a visual separation remains therefore retaining the areas open character. Whilst the existing garage is located to the front, it is separated from the host dwelling by a gap which provides glimpses towards rear gardens and nearby properties and https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Page 2 · Chunk 2 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/U1620/W/21/3273478 contributes to the open character. The proposed development would be taller than the existing garage and would fill in this gap, and would appear cramped and harmful to the character and appearance of the area. The proposed development would be readily visible from the highway appearing as a dominant form of development harming the street scene. 6. Despite the use of materials to match those in the host dwelling, the extent of the proposed development would exacerbate an undue prominence, particularly when travelling along Barnfields towards the appeal site. The effect of the scheme would be to diminish the character and appearance of the street scene and surrounding area. 7. For these reasons, the proposed development would introduce a discordant built form to the locality that would be out of keeping with and harmful to the character and appearance of the area.

Page 2 · Chunk 3 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision As such, it would conflict with Policies SD4 and SD14 of the Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy1 (JCS) (2017), Policies A9 and A10 of the Gloucester City Plan2 (CP) and the guidance contained within the Council’s ‘Home Extensions’ Supplementary Planning Document3 (SPD) (2008) which seek, amongst other things, to ensure that new development respond positively to, and respects the character of the site and its surroundings. The proposal also conflicts with paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks good design sympathetic to local character and development that responds positively to the surrounding context. Living Conditions 8. The proposed development is located to the front of the host dwelling, No 20 Barnfields, and to the side of No 22 Barnfields. The appeal site sits at a slightly higher level than No 22 and therefore the existing garage at the site is visible from the rear garden of the neighbouring property. Due to the orientation of the proposed development both its side and rear elevation would be visible from the rear garden of No 22. 9.

Page 2 · Chunk 4 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision The increase in the footprint of the garage together with the two-storey nature of the proposal and proximity to the garden of No 22 would create a dominant feature which would have an overbearing effect on the outlook from the garden of No 22. 10. The Council are also concerned with regards to the potential overshadowing of the rear garden of No 22. Sun path diagrams formed part of the application which detailed that much of the overshadowing that occurs in the garden of No 22 is existing, with the proposed development introducing some overshadowing to a small corner of the garden in the evening. The overshadowing is minor and limited to the bottom corner of the garden and as such would not be harmful to the living conditions of occupants of No 22. 11. Whilst the proposal would not harm the living conditions of the occupiers of No 22 with regards to overshadowing, it would have a harmful effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of No 22 in that it would have an overbearing effect, for the reasons I have given.

Page 2 · Chunk 5 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision The proposal would therefore be contrary to 1 Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy 2011 – 2031 (December 2017) 2 Pre-Submission Gloucester City Plan 2011 – 2031 (September 2019) 3 Gloucester City Council Home Extensions Guide – Interim Adoption Supplementary Planning Document (August 2008) https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Page 2 · Chunk 6 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision The proposal would therefore be contrary to 1 Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy 2011 – 2031 (December 2017) 2 Pre-Submission Gloucester City Plan 2011 – 2031 (September 2019) 3 Gloucester City Council Home Extensions Guide – Interim Adoption Supplementary Planning Document (August 2008) https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Page 3 · Chunk 7 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision Appeal Decision APP/U1620/W/21/3273478 Policy SD14 of the Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury JCS, Policy A9 of the Gloucester CP and the guidance contained within the SPD which seek, amongst other things, development that causes no unacceptable harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupants. The proposal also conflicts with paragraph 130 of the Framework which seeks, amongst other things, to safeguard the living conditions of existing and future residents. Other Considerations 12. I have had regard to the personal circumstances outlined by the appellant and whilst I have given this careful consideration, I am mindful of the advice contained in Planning Practice Guidance that in general planning is concerned with land use in the public interest. For this reason, I therefore find that this factor is not sufficient to outweigh the harm identified. 13. The appellant has stated that the proposed development offers significant social, economic and environmental benefits. This is over-stated. As the proposed development is for an annexe, the proposal would only make a very limited contribution to any associated socio-economic or environmental benefits and these would not overcome the harm identified. Conclusion 14.

Page 3 · Chunk 8 Appeal Decision

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Appeal Decision For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.

Page 3 · Chunk 9 Tamsin Law

20 Barnfields, GLOUCESTER, GL4 6WE — Gloucester City Council — Tamsin Law INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Extracted from the decision letter PDF and shown in full, chunk by chunk.

Main issues and findings

Character and appearance
Against appellant
¶4-7

The proposed development would be taller than the existing garage and would fill in a gap, appearing cramped and harming the street scene.

Living conditions
Against appellant
¶8-11

The proposal would create a dominant feature with an overbearing effect on the outlook from the garden of No 22, and would introduce some overshadowing to a small corner of the garden.

Policies relied on

Reference Weight
Policies SD4 and SD14 of the Gloucester, Cheltenham and Tewkesbury Joint Core Strategy, Policies A9 and A10 of the Glouc
Determinative
paragraph 130 of the National Planning Policy Framework
Determinative

Site constraints from the Casework Database

Conservation area
Green belt
Listed building setting
AONB
SSSI
Flooding an issue

Source

Decision letter, 3 pages, issued by the Planning Inspectorate on 8 September 2021 under the Open Government Licence.