Plans to almost double the size of a property on the outskirts of Barford have been thrown out by councillors because they were advised that the proposal would be disproportionate in open countryside.

Applicant Thomas Guy said the work was needed to modernise the dated property on Barford Road and argued that while his split-level home was in the conservation area, it was not in a countryside setting as it was in a row of houses on the road leading into the village.

But planning officer Sandip Sahota explained that council policy stated that with the home being outside of the village boundary, it was considered to be in open countryside and that the guideline for extensions suggested that they should be no more than 40 per cent of the original floor space.

In his report to this week's [TUE] planning committee of Warwick District Council he explained: "The proposed extensions along with previous additions equate to a 97 per cent increase above the floor area of the original dwelling. The proposals are substantial in scale and would represent a marked change in the overall visual dominance, scale, design and character of the dwelling, the proposed additional storey being the most noticeable change in visual dominance, character, design, scale and resulting from this application."

If granted, the plans would have seen a first floor extension above the upper and lower ground floor levels, a two-storey front extension to the existing lower ground level and a single-storey front extension to the upper ground level. There would have been a detached carport to the front, the replacement of an existing storage unit and the erection of entrance gates.

Mr Sahota added: "The additional storey would also reduce openness. Openness has both spatial and visual elements so whilst the footprint of development does not drastically change over and above the existing there is a significant visual reduction of openness by way of introducing a first floor above the existing low level dwelling which is currently relatively un-intrusive on the landscape. On this basis it is considered that the proposal is unacceptable."

There had been seven letters of public support centred around modernising the dated property, enhancing the site as a whole and adding that the proposals would not impact on neighbouring properties but planning permission was refused.