- Decision
- dismissed, 9 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: C McDonagh
- Authority
- Wyre Forest (West Midlands)
- Appeal reference
- 6010714
- Application reference
- 26/0005/HOU
- Procedure
- householder
- Development
- Two-storey side extension, replacement single-storey rear extensions, front garage and entrance canopy
- Site context
- green belt
- Green Belt
- Yes
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- GB7(1)(b), GB6(2)
- Development plan policies
- Wyre Forest Local Plan 2016-2036 DM.22, DM.25, Design Amenity and Shopfronts SPD 2024
- Main issues
- inappropriate development; openness; living conditions; VSC
Summary
Householder extensions to a semi-detached house in the Worcestershire Green Belt. The appeal was dismissed. The extensions were well beyond the SPD's 75% allowance and therefore disproportionate under GB7(1)(b). Permitted development and CLOPUD fallbacks got limited weight because they would be smaller and have no first floor at the side.
Issues and findings
- GB7(1)(b): FAIL. "Guidance it may be, but the SPD is relatively recent, and I see no reason not to give it significant weight … the parties agree that with a total volume of 661m³ the proposals would exceed both figures by some way" (DL ¶7). The proposal "would significantly exceed the recommended 75% increase over the original dwelling and constitute inappropriate development" (DL ¶8).
- Openness. Rear elements were neutral, but the forward two-storey side extension "would add significant bulk and mass … Spatially and visually, this would reduce openness" (DL ¶11). The overall loss was limited (DL ¶12).
- Fallback. Schneck [2022] EWHC 3335 (Admin) sets a low threshold for a real prospect. But the fallback "would still be less than the proposal by a significant margin … there would seemingly be no first floor" (DL ¶19-22).
Planning balance
GB6(2). The benefits did not clearly outweigh substantial-weight Green Belt harm (DL ¶25).
What made the difference
The numbers. Both parties' calculations put the scheme well over 75%. A design within the allowance, for example a two-storey side element with a smaller rear extension, was flagged as a possible alternative (DL ¶20).
Transferable points
- A recent local SPD percentage allowance for Green Belt extensions gets significant weight in applying GB7(1)(b) (DL ¶7).
- PD and CLOPUD fallbacks carry limited weight where they are materially smaller or avoid the harmful element, here the first floor at the side (DL ¶20-22).
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| GB7(1)(b) | fail | total 661 m³ significantly exceeds SPD 75% floor-area/volume allowance on either party's figure → disproportionate (DL 5-8) | |
| GB6(2) | harm | substantial | limited overall loss of openness — side extension forward and two-storey visible from road (DL 9-12, 25) |
| L2 | pass | rear extension breaches 45-degree code but no serious adverse effect on No.64 (DL 13-16) |
Key facts
- The SPD allows extensions up to 75% of the original (1948) floor area and volume, counting outbuildings within 5 m. It was given significant weight as recent guidance aligned with the Framework
- Fallbacks were a prior approval larger home extension (26/0266PNH) and a CLOPUD for porch, side extension and hip-to-gable (26/0265/CLP). Limited weight, because they would be smaller and single-storey at the side
- No consultation on the 2026 Framework — changes held "not material" (DL 2)
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.