Agenda Item 8 Report PC37/14. Date 8 May 2014 Director of Planning

Transcription

1 Report to Planning Committee Date 8 May 2014 By Local Authority Application Number Applicant Application Address Purpose of Report Director of Planning Horsham District Council SDNP/13/04908/FUL Mr S Davies Agenda Item 8 Report PC37/14 Conversion of redundant farm buildings, including a grade II listed granary barn into a single dwelling. Including the demolition of sheds, outbuildings and the re-instatement of collapsed structures. Manor Farm, Greatham Lane, Greatham, Pulborough, RH20 2ES. The application is reported to Committee for a decision. Recommendation: That planning permission be granted subject to: 1. The conditions set out in paragraph 10.1 of this report and 2. Completion of a S106 Agreement for 5,063 for contributions relating to infrastructure improvements, local libraries and fire and rescue services. Executive Summary The application site is within the hamlet of Greatham approximately 2km east of Coldwaltham. There are a number of buildings on the site including a grade II listed granary barn dating from the late 18 th century, single storey brick outbuildings and two modern steel framed barns. These buildings are set back from the road Greatham Lane by approximately 150m and are accessed via a track. The site is within the Greatham Conservation Area. There are fields and the river Arun to the west and north respectively. To the east is the grade II listed Greatham Manor and a grade 1 listed church which dates from the 12 th Century. The listed granary barn and outbuildings contribute to the character and appearance of the conservation area but are in a poor state of repair. They are proposed to be restored and converted into a large single dwelling, which would include a modern contemporary link between them. The site is the eastern side of a farmyard. On the western side is a 1.5 storey brick building which was a milking parlour. This building is proposed to be converted into a new dwelling also through a separate application (see agenda items 10 and 11 Reports PC39/14 and PC40/14). The application is recommended for approval because the proposals would facilitate the restoration and preservation of the buildings and enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area, without causing significant harm to the setting or the amenities of neighbouring properties and wider National Park landscape. The application is reported to the SDNPA Planning Committee because of the number of representations received to the application. 1 Site Description 1.1 The application site is within Greatham which is a hamlet in the countryside approximately 2km east of Coldwaltham and 2km south of Pulborough. It is situated on the northern side of Greatham Lane, which links Greatham to Coldwaltham and the A283 to the east. Greatham consists of the application site, described below, and a small number of dwellings and other buildings. These include Greatham Church, a 12 th century grade I listed building, Greatham Manor, a 17 th century grade II listed house and Greatham Manor Cottages which 14

2 are also grade II listed. These buildings lie to the north and east of the site. Manor Farmhouse (unlisted) is south of the site at the site access onto Greatham Lane and next to it is Greatham Manor Lodge (unlisted) where there is a separate access leading to Greatham Manor. The Greatham Conservation Area boundary is tightly defined around the grounds of these buildings including the application site. 1.2 The site forms the eastern part of a large redundant farmyard, predominantly surfaced with concrete, where there is a range of large steel framed open sided barns, brick buildings, and a large listed granary barn. The barn is a grade II listed timber framed building in the centre of the site, which dates from the late 18 th Century. This building has a stone and brick plinth with timber boarding on all but the south elevation, which is brick, and has various door and window openings. It has a half hipped tiled roof with exposed timber beams inside and rafter feet outside of the eaves. There is a raised entrance on the south side and the southern half of the barn has a timber floor raised by staddle stones. The barn is in a poor condition. 1.3 Either side of the barn are larger modern steel framed open sided barns with pitched fibre cement clad roofs. All three buildings abut the garden of Greatham Manor to the north. There is a long single storey L shaped brick building, with a gabled tiled roof, which runs parallel to these barns on their western side and in front of them to the south, to create a courtyard. The southern end of this building has partially collapsed. At the eastern side of the southern boundary, on the opposite side of the access, is a smaller brick outbuilding with an open frontage and hipped tiled roof. There is a range of smaller outbuildings along the eastern boundary stone wall, which separates the site from the driveway leading to Greatham Manor and church. 1.4 West of the site, within the farmyard, is a 1.5 storey brick building which was a milking parlour. It is parallel with the L shaped brick outbuilding and approximately 8m from it, in between which is an access surfaced in concrete. On the western side of the building is a large open steel framed barn. The western side of the farmyard is bordered by hedgerows. 1.5 The site is accessed via a track from Greatham Lane to the south and is approximately 150m from the road. The track runs between a field to the west and a hedgerow along the garden boundaries of Manor Farmhouse and Greatham Manor Lodge. There is a second short track from the main access into the application site. 1.6 The site is identified within the Arun and Lower Rother Floodplain Landscape Character Area in the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment (SDILCA). It is a pastoral landscape with small and irregular fields with dispersed patches of floodplain woodland and gentle valley sides of mixed farmland. The River Arun runs east to west approximately 250m north of the site. Hedgerows along the northern side of Greatham Lane largely screen the site from view. There are views through the access towards the site but it is not prominent from this location. Apart from a short footpath between Greatham Lane and the church further east of the site, there are no public other public footpaths in the immediate vicinity of the site. Wider views of the site are limited. Approximately 1km to the east is Pulborough Brooks which is a site managed by the RSPB and is a protected Ramsar site. 2 Relevant Planning History 2.1 DC/07/2496: Conversion of redundant farm buildings to 5 dwellings (to include 2 x no.4 bedroom, 2 x no.3 bedroom, and 1 x no.2 dwelling). Withdrawn. 2.2 DC/10/0192: Conversion of redundant agricultural buildings to 3 residential dwellings (to include 1 x no.4 bed, 1 x no.3 bed and 1 no.2 bedroom dwellings). Withdrawn. 2.3 SDNP/13/04909/LIS: Conversion of redundant farm buildings, including a grade II listed granary ban into a single dwelling. Demolition of sheds, outbuildings and the re-instatement of collapsed structures. Pending consideration Report PC38/14 at item 9 of the agenda. 2.4 SDNP13//04910/FUL: Conversion of redundant farm buildings into a single dwelling, including a proposed new build extension and new outbuildings. Also the demolition of existing sheds and outbuildings. Pending consideration Report PC39/14 at item 10 of the agenda. 15

3 2.5 SDNP13//04911/LIS: Conversion of redundant farm buildings into a single dwelling, including a proposed new build extension and new outbuildings. Also the demolition of existing sheds and outbuildings. Pending consideration Report PC40/14 at item 11 of the agenda. 3 Proposal 3.1 The application proposes the restoration and conversion of the listed barn and brick outbuildings, which form the courtyard, into a no.5 bedroom dwelling. The collapsed sections of the L shaped outbuilding would be rebuilt. The timber frame is proposed to be restored. The elevations would be re-clad with black timber weatherboarding and the roof would be re-roofed with reclaimed clay tiles. The southern brick wall and stone and brick plinth would be repaired using lime mortar. The existing door in the south elevation and window in the north elevation would be retained. The existing window openings in the east elevation would be retained and two larger windows of floor to eaves glazing are proposed. Two similar areas of glazing and windows are proposed on the west elevation. All new glazing would be timber framed. 3.2 A new link is proposed to join the barn and L shaped outbuilding. It would be sited at the northern end of these buildings and at the northern site boundary. The south elevation, facing into the courtyard, would be wholly glazed with a dark grey aluminium frame. It would have a pitched zinc roof which is smaller than the link s footprint and be offset from the middle of the roof to create an area of flat roof either side and behind it, which would also be clad with zinc. Two conservation roof lights are proposed on the rear (north) elevation of the pitched roof. Two further rooflights are proposed in the flat roof. 3.3 The existing window and door openings in L shaped outbuilding would be retained with new timber framed windows and the existing doors would be glazed. New timber doors of a rural appearance, as additional features, are also proposed for the glazing in the existing doorways. The southern section of this building would be re-built in brick, with a small section of timber weatherboarding on the east elevation, and have a hipped tiled roof. New glazing is proposed on the northern elevation of this part of the building. The north west corner of this building is also proposed to be glazed. 3.4 The main barn would accommodate the entrance, living and dining rooms, and kitchen. There would be two mezzanine floors for a study and library with vaulted ceilings either side. The contemporary link would accommodate an en-suite master bedroom. The L- shaped building would consist of no.4 bedrooms, a guest suite, and areas for a gym and home cinema. 3.5 The outbuilding in the south east corner is proposed to be a no.3 bay car port and double garage. The proposals include the removal of the two steel framed barns either side of the listed barn to create space for new courtyard areas surfaced with gravel, flagstone paving and lawn. New boundary hedging is proposed along with a small area of wildflowers on the southern side of the proposed garage. The existing access would be used. The stone walls on the eastern and northern walls area also proposed to be increased in height by 900mm and 600mm respectively. 3.6 The proposals also include provision for bats and barn owls. Specific bat access ridge tiles are proposed on all buildings and loft space above the double garage is specifically proposed as a bat loft. A barn owl nesting box is also proposed to be integrated within the roof above the car port. 3.7 In addition to the submitted plans, the application is accompanied by the following: Design and Access Statement Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment Bat Survey Report and ecological information (eg bat tile information) Structural Survey Report Drainage information Sustainability Statement 16

4 Heritage Significance and Planning Justification Statement Viability Report. 4 Consultations 4.1 English Heritage: The conservation area is at risk, in part due to the poor and deteriorating condition of vacant agricultural buildings which make up good part of the conservation area; listed granary barn and ancillary buildings make a positive contribution to the conservation area; small size of conservation area means any change within likely to have an impact on its character; impact must be assessed against NPPF; net effect of development would be harmful to the conservation area but less than substantially so; proposals would to some extent reinstate the plan of the historic farmstead by removing later functional structures; returning buildings to good state of repair desirable; residential conversion represents one (but not only) way of achieving this; proposals would result in very intensive use of the buildings; query compatibility of some of the structures for the uses proposed; cumulative effect of proliferation of openings, rooflights, glazing, partitions within modest buildings would harm the understanding of their historic form and function and may have wider implications on the character and appearance of the conservation area; proposals should be scrutinised for their impact on the significance of the designated and undesignated heritage assets and affect on the character and appearance of the conservation area. 4.2 Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB): Objection. Character and appearance of the conservation area would be substantially harmed and setting of the group of the buildings would be compromised; documentation doesn t set out the significance of the site in sufficient detail; subdividing the farmyard site into two substantial properties would be over development of the site; insufficient infrastructure in place to support development of this scale; proposals would impact upon the site s special qualities of remoteness and tranquillity; historic relationship between farm buildings would be diminished and damage their rural quality; a scheme which is more sympathetic to the modest scale of the historic farm more appropriate to protect the special qualities of the site; pleased to see historic structures repaired and given a sustainable use; scale and new use need to be extremely carefully considered so as not to detract from the character and interest of this important site. 4.3 SDNPA Historic Buildings Advisor: Support. Main issues are (1) impact on the listed building (2) impact on the conservation area (3) impact on the setting of other listed buildings in vicinity. Scheme represents the best chance of survival and would create a number of benefits for the various conservation interests in the vicinity. Historic farm group makes a positive contribution to the character of the conservation area and main listed barn at the core of this; it forms part of a wider historic group with the Manor House; loss of any historic part of the group would weaken its collective significance and character of the wider conservation area; modern steel framed farm buildings undermine the historic qualities of the conservation area and setting of listed buildings; buildings unlikely to return to agricultural use; new use needed to halt decay; the eventual loss of these traditional farm buildings would be detrimental to conservation area; residential scheme has a low impact on the appearance of the main barn group and wider conservation interests, whilst removing negative modern farm structures; proposals represent the best option to secure the future of the buildings and retain and enhance their contribution to the wider historic environment. Details of all new windows and joinery will be required via condition. Pre-commencement condition required for a method statement to agree repair of timber frame and for all brick repairs. 4.4 Landscape Advice: Would not compromise historic field boundaries, but there is subdivision between the two sites (milking parlour); no intrusive lighting recommended. Loss of modern barns should enhance the setting of the older farm buildings and reveal the earlier layout of the farmstead. Other detailed comments relate to the separate application relating to the milking parlour. 4.5 Environment Agency: No objection. 4.6 Natural England: No objection. 17

5 4.7 Highways Agency: No objection. 4.8 Highways Authority: Accident records show no personal injury accidents in vicinity of existing point of access; low risk of highway safety issues; proposals would have an overall reduction in vehicular movements compared to agricultural use; recommend precommencement condition to provide visibility splays; visibility is restricted to the west by the field boundary hedge; site not in a sustainable location; occupiers will be reliant on private car however previous application have indicated commercial or business use are not viable; infrastructure contribution of 4,500 required. 4.9 Ecologist (West Sussex County Council): No objection. Plans detail suitable mitigation measures; only require condition that development proceeds in accordance with submitted plans; recommend informative relating to European Protected Species Licence West Sussex County Council: Financial contribution totalling 563 required for local libraries, fire and rescue service Environmental Health (Horsham District Council): No response Horsham District Council (Planning Policy): Site located in countryside; NPPF outlines a presumption in favour of sustainable development; concern raised on whether the proposals could be considered as a sustainable form of development; Council s policies direct development to more sustainable locations in defined built up areas and previously developed land within towns and villages with a good range of services and facilities; Core Strategy policies require landscape character to be maintained and enhanced; development outside of built up areas must be considered essential to a countryside location and not lead to an increase in the overall level of activity in the countryside; new isolated homes should be avoided unless necessary for agricultural or forestry workers; converted buildings should be in sustainable locations and commercial uses favoured in first instance Parish Council: Objection. Not against principle of sympathetic conversion of farm buildings; allowing the buildings to decay further is unattractive; concerned proposed zinc roof of the contemporary link would be out of character in rural setting; natural slate roof preferable. 5 Representations objections and 97 letters of support have been received which raise the following points: Objections Unsustainable location Impact on cultural heritage (listed buildings and conservation area) Harm link between the site with manor and the church Impact on National Park landscape Strain on local infrastructure Two large dwellings out of keeping Impact on additional traffic and highway safety Inappropriate scale and design proposed Two large dwellings out of keeping with the area Buildings could be put to other uses No community consultation from Developers or SDNP Concern relating to application process Protection of conservation area Additional traffic Impact on tranquil character of conservation area and Greatham Impact on amenities of neighbouring dwellings Precedent Impact on ecology 18

6 Impact from flooding Support Re-use of a brownfield site Buildings in unsightly condition and of no valuable agricultural use Site derelict and underused Allowing buildings to fall into disrepair has detrimental impact No harm caused to neighbouring properties Benefit to countryside and local community Improve appearance of the area Make better use of redundant buildings Substantial investment required to conserve them Reduce noise/activity from being a farm Sympathetic conversion and appropriate design proposed Reinstating historical layout No impact on views No traffic impact. 5.2 CPRE: Objection. Scale and character of the proposed development inappropriate to the Conservation Area and its setting; development would not make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness; proposals would not make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the conservation area and listed buildings; setting of listed buildings would be harmed; inappropriate overdevelopment which would harm the unique conservation area, cultural heritage and visitor s experience of the SDNP. 5.3 South Downs Society: Objection. Proposals out of scale and of an inappropriate design; over intensive approach which would have adverse impact on the setting of listed buildings and conservation area, Greatham and SDNP. Farm buildings make a positive contribution to the landscape and merit retention and re-use; removal of more modern farm buildings welcomed; essential to establish any future need for farming purposes or other business use before accepting residential; occupation would generate domestic paraphernalia; additional vehicular traffic detrimental to tranquil character; significant intensification of activity should not be encouraged; unsustainable location; restoration increasingly urgent, any development should be appropriate and sensitive. 5.4 The Wiggonholt Association: Objection. Farmyard and adjacent land forms a substantial part of the conservation area; the buildings have deteriorated considerably; previous English Heritage Advice relevant; unsympathetic conversion of buildings; courtyard arrangement insensitive to the rural and conservation area setting; contemporary link unsympathetic to the character and amenity of Manor Farm; alien fenestration, lighting and materials proposed, potential overlooking; Partnership Management Plan is a material consideration. 5.5 The Amberley Society: Objection. Proposals would cause harmful change to the conservation area; scale of development overpowering and inappropriate for the SDNP; dominate the adjacent historic buildings; residential conversion best way to conserve the listed building; unsympathetic conversion and poor design; proposals would harm special qualities of the area; would not accord with National Park purposes; would set a precedent; development would be subdivided into multiple occupation. 6 Planning Policy Context 6.1 Applications must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The statutory development plan in this area is the Horsham Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007) and General Development Control Policies (2007). The relevant policies to this application are set out in section 7, below. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Circular

7 6.2 Government policy relating to National Parks is set out in English National Parks and the Broads: UK Government Vision and Circular 2010 and The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which was issued and came into effect on 27 March The Circular and NPPF confirm that National Parks have the highest status of protection and the NPPF states at paragraph 115 that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in the National Parks and that the conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations and should also be given great weight in National Parks. 6.3 Paragraphs 55 and of the NPPF are relevant in the consideration of this application. Paragraph 55 promotes sustainable development in rural areas and outlines that housing should be resisted unless there are special circumstances such as where such development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets. 6.4 Paragraphs outline national policy on the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. Paragraph 131 states that in determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of: The desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; The positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and The desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. 6.5 Paragraph 132 outlines that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset s conservation. Paragraphs outline that the harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset should be weighed against the public benefit of the proposals. National Park Purposes 6.3 The two statutory purposes of the SDNP designation are: To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of their areas; To promote opportunities for the public understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of their areas. 6.4 If there is a conflict between these two purposes, conservation takes precedence. There is also a duty to foster the economic and social well being of the local community in pursuit of these purposes. Relationship of the Development Plan to the NPPF and Circular The saved Development Plan policies listed below have been assessed. It is considered that they are in general conformity. Policy DC24, however, may only be partially compliant because criterion (a) requires development not to be in an isolated locations, but paragraph 55 of the NPPF allows dwellings in countryside locations provided the development accords with one of its 4 provisos, including to secure the optimal viable use of a heritage asset. South Downs Partnership Management Plan 6.6 The South Downs Partnership Management Plan (SDPMP) was adopted on 3 December It sets out a vision and long term outcomes for the National Park, as well as 5 year policies and a continually updated Delivery Framework. The SDPMP is a material consideration in planning applications and has some weight pending the adoption of the SDNP Local Plan. The following policies are relevant: Policy 9: Protection of the significance of the historic environment Policy 10: Improve the management of heritage assets. Policy 50: Housing and other development in the National Park. 20

8 7 Development Plan Policies 7.1 The Horsham Local Development Framework Core Strategy and General Development Control Policies were adopted in February and December 2007 respectively. The following policies of the Horsham District Local Development Framework 2007 are relevant to this application: CP1: Landscape and Townscape Character CP3: Improving the Quality of New Development DC1: Protection and enhancement of the countryside DC5: Biodiversity and Geology DC9: Development Principles DC12: Conservation Areas DC13: Listed Buildings DC24: Conversion of agricultural and rural buildings DC40: Transport and access 8 Planning Assessment 8.1 Key issues in the assessment of this application are the principle of the proposed residential conversion of the buildings and the impact of the conversion works on Greatham Conservation Area and the listed buildings. In respect of the conservation area, Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Area) Act 1990 requires that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area. 8.2 Paragraph 131 of the NPPF outlines that in determining planning applications Local Planning Authorities should take account of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation. Paragraph 132 of the NPPF outlines that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset s conservation. Furthermore, paragraphs 133 and 134 outline that the harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset should be weighted against the public benefits of the proposals. 8.3 Policy DC24 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007 permits the conversion of rural buildings for commercial or residential use provided proposals meet each of its five criteria. These relate to (a) the building not being in an isolated location (b) it is of a suitable scale for the level of activity proposed and it is capable of conversion without substantial reconstruction, (c) it has been in used for 10 years or more, (d) the proposals will maintain or enhance the architectural character of the buildings and the character of their settings, (e) the proposed uses can be accommodated in the existing buildings and car parking requirements can be satisfactorily accommodated within the immediate surrounds of the buildings. 8.4 Policy DC 12 addresses development in conservation areas. Its criteria relate to development being of a design and or scale that preserves or enhances the special character or appearance of the area and is compatible with neighbouring buildings and spaces; uses appropriate materials, building techniques; retains historic features and historic value; restores traditional features and improves the condition of structures worthy of retention; impact on views; protects significant landscape features, proposes appropriate landscaping, and the removal of unsympathetic features and the reinstatement of missing features. 8.5 The site is 2km from Coldwaltham where there is a range of services and facilities, but it is in a relatively isolated location whereby any future occupiers would be reliant on the private car. The proposals therefore do not meet criterion (a) of Policy DC24 in this respect. Whilst paragraph 55 of the NPPF promotes sustainable development in rural areas and advocates that new isolated homes in the countryside should be avoided, there is a proviso where there are special circumstances such as the development being the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or where the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement to the immediate setting. Furthermore, whilst the buildings are in a poor condition, the proposals would meet criteria (b) and (c) of this policy given the 21

9 scale and age of the buildings and they are still capable of conversion with only the southern end of the L shaped outbuilding requiring reconstruction works. Criteria (d) and (e) are addressed below and it is considered that the proposals accord with these criteria and consequently with this policy. 8.6 The Greatham Conservation Area is on English Heritage s Heritage at Risk Register. The main listed barn and the outbuildings are in a poor state of repair and the status of the conservation area is a reflection of their condition. A submitted viability report outlines that a residential use for the site is the only viable option, particularly given the renovation costs. Furthermore, the site is not suitable for modern agriculture because of its size and accessibility for modern farm machinery and any other commercial use may not be suitable because of the rural location, its potential impact on the buildings, conservation area, neighbouring listed buildings, and amenities of neighbouring properties. For instance, a commercial use would likely generate more traffic and activity on site, which could affect the character and appearance of the conservation area and listed buildings. 8.7 SPAB raise concerns that the subdivision of the farmyard into two substantial properties (including reference to the separate application to convert the milking parlour) would overdevelop the site and place the site s special qualities at severe risk. In particular, the historic relationship between the existing farm buildings would be diminished and harm the rural qualities and the historic organic development of the site. The proposals would not be introducing any new built form over and above the original farmstead layout and the range of buildings would be used as a single dwelling. This would be a suitable scale and low key use for the building and for this reason the proposals would accord with criterion (d) of Policy DC24. Similarly, the adjacent site is also proposed to be developed as a single dwelling. Whilst each application should be considered on its merits, both proposals would enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and cumulatively would not over develop the whole farmyard. 8.8 The historic farm group makes a positive contribution to the character of the conservation area, as recognised by English Heritage, and the main listed barn is at the core of this. The site s derelict appearance detracts from the character and appearance of the Greatham conservation area. The retention of these buildings is important because, whilst the farm use has ceased, they are part of a wider historic group with the Manor House and church and the loss of any historic part of the group would weaken its collective significance and harm character of the conservation area. The loss of the barn in particular would weaken the link between Greatham s historic core and agriculture. 8.9 SPAB acknowledges the need to protect this group of buildings. It does, however, outline the new uses need to be carefully considered and be of a scale which does not detract from the character and interest of the site and conservation area. The conversion of the listed barn and outbuildings would facilitate much needed repairs and their restoration, which would benefit the character and appearance of the conservation area. Their use as a single dwelling would be a low key use compared to agricultural or commercial uses and, as outlined in 8.6, a residential use would be the optimal viable use for the site. A single dwelling would also be a more appropriate scale than multiple smaller dwellings for instance as it could preserve the character of the buildings without overdeveloping the site, whilst conserve the special qualities of the conservation area English Heritage raise concern that the proposals may harm the character and appearance of the conservation area. The re-building of a link between the barn and the L shaped outbuilding and the collapsed section of this outbuilding would reinstate the historic layout pattern of the farmyard, which is acknowledged by English Heritage. The original scale of the barn and outbuildings, apart from the new link, are also unchanged. The rural quality of the buildings, conservation area or their relationship with and setting of Manor Farm, the church and conservation area would not be substantially harmed by virtue of the proposed residential use or the design, in accordance with policies DC24 and DC Furthermore, the setting of the listed barn is currently compromised by the open metal frame barns either side of it. Their removal would also better reveal the historic character of the barn and its outbuildings and consequently enhance their setting as well as the 22

10 character and appearance of the conservation area and setting of adjacent listed buildings. On balance, therefore, the conservation benefits to developing this site outweigh the policy objection to the creation of new dwellings in this rural location. The removal of the large barns and sympathetic development of the site would not only enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area and conserve the buildings, it would also enhance the National Park landscape as a consequence of this notwithstanding the limited wider views of the site. The preservation of these buildings and conservation area would accord with policies DC12 and DC24 in particular, the NPPF, and the first purpose of National Park designation The proposed design would retain the agricultural feel and character of the site. It would be a scheme which would have a relatively low impact on the appearance of the main barn group and wider conservation area. The re-instatement of the outbuildings and restoration of the barn as a cohesive group would re-instate its original farm layout, as acknowledged by English Heritage. The elevations have been sensitively treated with new timber boarding and existing openings are retained. The internal timber frame would be restored and preserved with the accommodation in the barn providing minimal subdivision to retain the open nature of the barn English Heritage raise concern that there would be an excessive proliferation of openings, rooflights, or glazing within the proposals. The majority of the openings proposed as windows and doors are existing openings which would be retained and those which are proposed are the minimum necessary to make the barn and outbuildings into a viable dwelling. This impact is considered to have less than substantial harm to the building, which is outweighed by the public benefit of restoring the building and enhancing the conservation area. The scheme would not harm their agricultural character and understanding of their historic form and function The modern link is required to make the buildings function as a dwelling. It would also reinstate a link between the barn and outbuilding. Using it as a bedroom also serves to limit the sub-division of the main barn. Policy DC24 requires new residential proposals to be of a traditional construction and architectural/historic interest. In this instance the main barn and outbuildings retain the rural character and appearance of the buildings. The link is distinctly different to the existing character of the existing buildings, however, it would not detract from this character and distinguish new from old and not create a pastiche form of development. In light of the above, the proposals would not cause substantial harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area The use of the south east barn as a car port would also secure appropriate parking on site and the new landscaped courtyard areas either side of the barn would provide an appropriate setting for the building. It proposes parking arrangements which accord with criterion (e) of Policy DC The conversion of the barn into a new dwelling would be more in keeping with the adjacent dwellings than if a commercial use occupied the building, which could cause undue harm to their amenities. Concern has been raised about overlooking from the upper window in the north elevation of the main barn. Whilst views out of this window would only be possible from the mezzanine floor 9.8m back from within the barn, a condition requiring that this window is obscure glazed to remove any potential overlooking The roof of the link would be seen from the neighbouring garden but it would be set back from the high boundary wall and the roof is only 3.5m high and slopes away from the boundary. On this basis, it would not be an obtrusive feature when viewed from the neighbouring garden. Furthermore, the garaging would be a good distance from the neighbouring house to avoid any harmful noise disturbance The scheme includes suitable bat and barn owl provision within the scheme and suitable mitigation is therefore provided. No objection has been raised to using the existing access subject to a condition requiring adequate visibility splays. The proposed garaging would provide suitable parking provision. New landscaping has been proposed around the site 23

11 boundaries. Indicative planting and species have only been provided and so further details are required via a condition. 9 Conclusion 9.1 For the reasons above, a residential use would be an optimal viable use to secure the preservation of these heritage assets, which would outweigh the harm of a new dwelling in the countryside. The retention of the buildings, the removal of the modern barns and the sensitive design of the restoration works could, on balance, conserve and enhance the conservation area, listed barn, and setting of neighbouring listed buildings. 10 Recommendation and Conditions 10.1 It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement for the payment of 5,063 infrastructure and services contributions and the following conditions: 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with the provisions of Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). 2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and details listed below under the heading "Plans Referred to in Consideration of this Application." Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans and policies CP1, CP3, DC9, DC12, DC24 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007 and NPPF. 3. No development shall commence before details including samples of all facing and surfacing materials used have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the SDNPA. Thereafter the development shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development has an acceptable appearance in accordance with policies CP1, CP3, DC9, DC12, DC24 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007and the NPPF. 4. Notwithstanding the details submitted with the application, no part of the site shall be first occupied before a revised scheme of soft landscape works has been submitted to and approved in writing by the SDNPA. These details shall include: a. Planting specifications detailing schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes, proposed numbers/densities and soil amelioration where appropriate. A more rural and informal design shall be adopted which should include native hedgerows along site boundaries, a greater number of trees at a variety of planting sizes in a less formal arrangement. The frontage boundary planting shall be designed so as it is passively safe in regard to highway safety. b. Tree pit details. c. Retained areas of grassland cover, scrub, hedgerow, trees and woodland; d. A schedule of landscape maintenance for a minimum period of 5 years including details of the arrangements for its implementation. Reason: To improve the appearance of the site in the interests of visual amenity and to comply with policies CP1, CP3, DC9, DC12 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007, National Park purposes, and the NPPF. 5. The landscaping scheme approved under condition 4 shall be implemented within the first planting season following first occupation. Trees, shrubs and hedges planted in accordance with the approved landscaping scheme shall be maintained in accordance with the approved scheme and if any within five years of planting die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season 24

12 with others of a similar size and species, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the SDNPA. Reason: In the interests of the amenity of the local area, in accordance with policies CP1, CP3, DC9, DC12 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007, National Park purposes, and the NPPF. 6. No development shall commence until details and a method statement for works to the restoration of the granary barn and outbuildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the SDNP. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and methodology. Reason: To ensure the works are undertaken sensitively, in accordance with policies DC9, DC12, DC13, DC24 and CP3 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007, National Park purposes, and NPPF. 7. Prior to the insertion of the windows and doors hereby permitted, detailed elevation and sectional drawings of the windows at the scale not less than 1:10 shall be submitted to and approved by the SDNP. Reason: To ensure a high quality development, in accordance with policies DC9, DC12, DC13, DC24 and CP3 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007, National Park purposes, and the NPPF. 8. Visibility splays of 2.4m x 75m to the west and 2.4m x 60m to the east shall be provided at the site access and maintained in perpetuity, in accordance with Plan P3. Reason: in the interests of highway safety, in accordance with Policy DC40 and the NPPF. 9. The upper floor window in the north elevation of the granary barn shall be obscure glazed with obscure glass to a minimum level of obscurity equivalent to Pilkington Texture Glass Level 3, or similar equivalent. Reason: To protect the amenities of the neighbouring dwelling, in accordance with Policy DC9 of Horsham Local Development Framework 2007 and NPPF. 10. The development hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with the Bat Survey Report dated 25 September Reason: To ensure the protection of protected species, in accordance with Policy DC5 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007, National Park purposes, and NPPF. 11. The new walling on the east and north boundary walls shall conform with a sample panel and mortar treatment which shall be erected on site and approved in writing by the SDNP before work to these walls is commenced. Reason: To preserve the special character of the wall, which contributes to the character and appearance of the conservation area, in accordance with policies DC9, DC12 and DC13 of the Horsham Local Development Framework 2007, National Park purposes and NPPF. 11 Crime and Disorder Implications 11.1 It is considered that the proposal does not raise any crime and disorder implications 12 Human Rights Implications 12.1 This planning application has been considered in light of statute and case law and any interference with an individual s human rights is consider to be proportionate to the aims sought to be realised. 13 Equalities Act Due regard, where relevant, has been taken to the South Down National Park Authority s equality duty as contained within the Equalities Act

13 14 Proactive Working 14.1 In reaching this decision the local planning authority has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive way, in line with the NPPF. Tim Slaney Director of Planning South Downs National Park Authority Contact Officer: Richard Ferguson Tel: richard.ferguson@southdowns.gov.uk Appendices 1. Location Map SDNPA Consultees Director of Planning & Legal Services Background Documents Planning Application Documents Consultee Comments 26

14 Agenda Item 8 Report PC37/14 Appendix 1 Location Map This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty s Stationery Office (c) Crown Copyright (Not to Scale) 27