A DWELLING which was built to twice the size of approved specifications could be demolished after retrospective plans were rejected by Cotswold District Council's planning committee.

At the meeting members voted to refuse retention of the unauthorised building on land at Orchard Rise, Charingworth, near Chipping Campden and to authorise enforcement action which requires demolition of the new house built on the land.

Development plans were first approved in 2007 for the demolition of a 1960s dwelling and the building of a 1.5 storey house in its place.

The site is within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

A further application in 2011 to allow a larger dwelling was rejected but a revised application reducing the overall size of the proposed house was approved in 2012. The house approved had two floors and three bedrooms.

However, an enforcement officer visited the site in late 2014 as work was ongoing following a complaint the work was not being carried out in accordance with the plans. The applicant, Stephanie Ayres, was told if they continued it would be at their own risk. The completed house has six bedrooms and is 90 per cent larger than originally agreed. It is now being occupied.

Enforcement officers reported concerns about the landscape. They say the house 'appears more formal and grandiose than the more modest and plainer cottage-style development previously approved' and that it appears as a 'very prominent and obtrusive feature within the landscape'.

The planning committee voted to reject the retention of the dwelling as it contravened the Local Plan policy to restrict the size and scale of replacement dwellings in the Cotswolds AONB, stating there were no material considerations to justify a departure from the policy in this case.

Commenting on the case, Councillor Sue Jepson, the CDC Cabinet Member for Planning and Housing, said: “There are strict regulations regarding development in the district and developers always run the risk of demolition notices being served if they do not have regard to them. This sounds rather drastic, but we need to preserve the integrity of the planning system, which enables professionals to consider the merits of applications across a wide range of criteria, and also gives the public the right to make their views known."