Bath Road venue slams 'poorly judged' council refusal as outbuilding appeal won

A bar and restaurant in Littlewick Green has won out in a planning battle for a new storage building, which the council claimed was ‘inappropriate development in the greenbelt’.

The Bell and Bottle in Bath Road, which houses Javatri Indian Restaurant, appealed to Government body the Planning Inspectorate after its outbuilding bid was refused.

Planning inspector John Morrison has now ruled in the business’ favour, given the building a green light and said it ‘would not be inappropriate’ development.

RBWM refused permission for the outdoor addition in the car park to the rear of Bell and Bottle in October, 2025, following refusal for a similar proposal in 2024.  

The restaurant wanted to demolish a concrete garage with a flat corrugated metal roof and build a single-storey outbuilding for storage for the venue in its place.

The storage building would have three rooms, be 60cm taller and 11 square metres larger than the existing garage.

A planning statement on behalf of the plans said changes to national planning policy, weighed in favour of building work on already built land in the greenbelt.

The statement said: ‘There is no longer a requirement to demonstrate very special circumstances or meet one of the exceptions set out…

“As a result, the proposed development is not bound by any size limitations or assessment of harm to the openness of the greenbelt."

But RBWM disagreed and, in planning documents, council officers wrote: “The submission does not include a case for very special circumstances.

“In this context, there are considered to be no very special circumstances and therefore no case for outweighing the harm to the greenbelt.”

The refusal concluded: “The development would constitute inappropriate development in the greenbelt.”

The restaurant appealed the council’s refusal to the Planning Inspectorate – a government body responsible for determining planning disputes.

A statement on behalf of the bid claimed the council’s decision had been ‘poorly judged’ and was ‘unreasonable’.

It added: “It is unclear why the Council have taken such a negative approach to this minor development.

“The refusal is at odds with the Government’s clear intention to advance a more practical and balanced approach to development on previously developed land within the greenbelt.”

The inspector’s report said the outbuilding ‘would not be inappropriate in greenbelt terms’ and that while it would be larger than the existing garage, it would not be ‘materially larger’.

“It would be larger and I am acutely aware of the figures in the council’s evidence amounting to a 60 per cent increase in volume over the existing situation,” the report said.

“However, materiality is different to just an increase and more than a product of a paper exercise.”

The report added: “The proposal would neatly fit between the existing development and would be of small scale and stature in the context of the wider site."

Approval was granted subject to conditions that documents showing the ‘final finish’ of the planned structure be provided, and that it be used only for storage purposes.