# Weavers Cottage, Church End, Priors Hardwick

- **Decision:** approved, 7 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Council officer (delegated): Case officer Ian Guffick
- **Authority:** Stratford-on-Avon (West Midlands)
- **Application reference:** 26/01211/FUL
- **Procedure:** householder
- **Development:** Change of use of agricultural land to residential and single-storey pool extension partly on that land, plus rear extension and car port
- **Site context:** settlement-edge, open-countryside, conservation-area
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** S4(1), S5(1)(c), S3(2)
- **Development plan policies:** Stratford-on-Avon Core Strategy 2016 AS.10, CS.8, CS.9, CS.12, CS.20
- **Main issues:** settlement boundary, residential curtilage extension into countryside
- **Tags:** s3-2-split-site, s4-within-settlement, s5-1-c-reuse, householder, settlement-status-inconsistent, stratford-relevant

## Summary
A householder scheme at the edge of Priors Hardwick that extended the house onto adjoining farmland. Granted under delegated powers on 7 September 2026. The officer split the site in substance as S3(2) requires: S4 for the curtilage, which was held "within the physical confines of the village", and S5(1)(c) for the part on agricultural land.

## Issues and findings
- **Settlement status.** "The dwelling and its gardens are considered to be within the physical confines of the village. The applicant owns the agricultural land surrounding the property. This land is not within the physical confines of the village and is therefore open countryside" (Report p.4).
- **S5(1)(c).** "The extension that would lie outside of the physical confines of the village would not be a disproportionate increase in size compared to the existing building" (p.5).
- **Conclusion.** "I also consider the proposal accords with NDMPs S4 and S5, and therefore represents sustainable development" (p.9).

## Planning balance
No harm identified, so the balance was not needed.

## What made the difference
Small scale and a discreet location.

## Transferable points
- In villages without a BUAB, SDC officers decide whether a site is within a "settlement" by judging "physical confines" case by case (p.4). Compare stratford-26-00898-FUL: another Priors Hardwick house was treated as countryside, and so went through S5(1)(c) and (j) rather than S4.
- S3(2) splits are being applied at householder scale (pp.4–5).

## Policy findings
- **S3(2): pass.** not cited by name, but applied in substance; extensions within the curtilage assessed under S4 and the part on agricultural land under S5
- **S4(1): pass.** dwelling and garden held "within the physical confines of the village"
- **S5(1)(c): pass.** the extension onto agricultural land is "not … a disproportionate increase in size compared to the existing building"
- **HE9: pass.** no harm to conservation area

## Key facts
- Priors Hardwick has no BUAB; the officer used "physical confines" to find the house within a settlement
- Six days earlier (stratford-26-00898-FUL) another officer treated a house at Lower End, Priors Hardwick, as open countryside "outside of any BUAB"; the two sites may genuinely differ in relation to the village's physical confines, and neither report maps them

## Sources
- https://apps.stratford.gov.uk/Eplanningv2/AppDetail/Index/5005d75f-c1f1-c480-231d-08deb2596136

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/stratford-26-01211-FUL.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the officer report. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.