Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
Application Number 10/00138/AS
Location The Old Post Office, Wye Road, Boughton Aluph, Ashford, Kent, TN25 4HH
Grid Reference 02283/47302
Parish Council Boughton Aluph
Ward Boughton Aluph and Eastwell
Application Proposed replacement of existing dilapidated lean to side Description extension by a new conservatory
Applicant Mr and Mrs F Edwards, The Old Post Office, Wye Road, Boughton Aluph, Ashford, Kent, TN25 4HH
Agent Mr Charles Brackenbury, Charles Brackenbury Architects, 29 Scotton Street, Wye, Ashford, Kent, TN25 5BU
Site Area 0.2 Hectares
(a) 2/- (b) S (c) -
Introduction
1. The application is being reported to the Planning Committee at the request of the Ward Member Councillor Mrs Hawes. The Ward Member is not a Member of the Planning Committee.
Site and Surroundings
2. The application site comprises a detached dwellinghouse located inside the built confines of Boughton Lees for the purposes of development control. The site lies within the Boughton Lees Conservation Area, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a Special Landscape Area and the Boughton Lees Horticultural Valley Landscape Character Area.
3. The two storey dwelling is grade II listed and is described in the listing details as a17th Century timber framed dwelling with 18th Century Cladding. The character of the building is red brick with a clay tile roof and a brick modillion eaves cornice to the hipped roof. There are later single storey 20th Century extensions to the east and west side elevations however despite these
7.1 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
additions the building has retained its primary historic interest and has a strong simple plan form.
4. The property, which fronts onto and is very visible from the village green, is set back from the highway by approximately 8 metres.
5. Plans of the site are attached to this report as annex 1.
Proposal
6. Full planning permission is sought for the erection of a single storey side extension with a floor area of 16m² (listed building consent is also required for this, see 10/00139/AS on this agenda). The proposed extension would replace the existing lean to style side extension which has a floor area of 9m².
7. Existing and proposed plans are attached as annex 2 to this report.
8. The applicant has submitted information in support of the scheme which can be summarised as follows: • The development would replace an unsightly existing lean to extension in a dilapidated state and is not simply a new first time extension in this location. • Conservatories are seen on rural cottages and are therefore traditional. • The reason for the shallow pitched roof is to ensure that traditional brick wall with corbelled eaves above remains fully visible. • The development meets with the key criteria set out in PPS5 and the companion guide ‘Historic Environment Planning Practice Guide’
Planning History
9. There is no relevant planning history.
Consultations
Ward Member: The Ward Member, Councillor Mrs Hawes, requests that the application is considered by the Planning Committee.
Boughton Aluph Parish Council: Support the application
Neighbours: 2 neighbours directly consulted. 0 representations received.
7.2 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
Planning Policy
10. The Development Plan comprises the Regional Spatial Strategy (The South East Plan, May 2009), the saved policies in the adopted Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000, the adopted LDF Core Strategy 2008 and the adopted Ashford Town Centre Action Area Plan 2010.
11. The relevant policies from the Development Plan relating to this application are as follows:-
South East Plan 2009 CC1 – Sustainable development. C4 – Landscape and countryside management. BE6 – Management of the historic environment.
Ashford Borough Local Plan 2000 EN16 – Development in Conservation Areas EN27 - Landscape conservation.
Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2008 CS1 – Guiding principles. CS9 – Design quality.
12. The following are also material to the determination of this application:-
Government Advice Planning Policy Statement 1 – ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ Planning Policy Statement 5 – ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’
Supplementary Planning Guidance Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 10 – ‘Domestic Extensions in Urban and Rural Areas’ adopted June 2004 following public consultation.
Tenterden & Rural Sites DPD TRS17 – Landscape character and design
13. Members should note that the Tenterden & Rural Sites DPD should be given some weight when making a decision as it has now been submitted to the Secretary of State for examination but where the policy conflicts with the Development Plan, the Development Plan takes precedence unless this report advises otherwise.
7.3 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
Assessment
14. The main issues for consideration are: • The impact of the development upon the character and appearance of the listed building and the visual amenity of the wider landscape designated as a Conservation Area, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a Landscape Character Area and a Special Landscape Area. • Justification for the development. • Residential amenity.
Policy and Guidance Context
15. Section 66 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires Local Authorities when considering applications for planning permission for development that affects a listed building to have a special regard to the desirability of preserving the building and any features of architectural or historic interest which it may possess.
16. Section 72 of the above act also states that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area. In addition a key principle of PPS1 states that design which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area should not be accepted.
17. This is further endorsed by Central Government Guidance contained within PPS5 and its companion guide which sets out a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets such as listed buildings. This guidance states that whilst some listed buildings and Conservation Areas will be particularly important or sensitive to change others may be more capable of accommodating it. Local planning authorities must therefore take into account the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and of utilising their positive role of place shaping and sustainable communities. The guidance also states that new development should make a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment through design that has taken into account the character of the building and the surrounding area and should not result in a loss of significance.
18. In addition to the above national guidance the Councils own adopted supplementary planning guidance (SPG10) makes provision for extensions to residential dwellings as a matter of principle provided that the proposed extension is justified, sympathetic to the design and scale of the existing
7.4 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
dwelling and would not result in a poorly proportioned or visually intrusive form of development within the landscape.
The Impact of the Development Upon the Character and Appearance of the Listed Building and the Visual Amenity of the Wider Designated Area
19. The existing modern extension is not typically traditional in its overall design or a sympathetic addition to this building however its small size assists in lessening the impact upon the character of the building and the surrounding area. The removal of this addition would represent a visual improvement to the character and appearance of the building and the Conservation Area.
20. The replacement side extension, whilst single storey, would be larger than the existing extension in floor area and more decorative in its design and form resulting in a more prominent addition which will be visible from public view points within the Conservation Area. The shallow roof pitch, materials and detailing do not replicate that of the building itself and are not a traditional form but rather a style that is typically modern. The frame of the conservatory would be white aluminium rather than the more traditional timber As such the proposed development would not represent a sympathetic addition to this heritage asset and would fail to preserve the building’s historic character and appearance and would therefore be inappropriate. The extension exacerbates the harm caused by the existing addition and therefore fails to comply with the requirements of PPS1 and PPS5.
21. Because of this and as the proposed extension is on a very visible elevation it would also fail to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area, the visual amenity of the designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the Special Landscape Area or the Landscape Character Area.
22. Given that the extension would replace an existing unsympathetic modern addition I consider that a replacement extension could be acceptable in principle. A more traditional approach would however be required such as a largely brick extension, albeit with large amounts of glazing on the side and rear elevation with a clay tiled roof. This would be more in keeping with the existing character of the dwelling. This approach would however necessitate the extension to be rationalised in terms of floor area as the width would need to be reduced to ensure that the roof would not interfere with the eaves of the existing building which are considered to be of particular importance to the building’s historic interest.
Justification for the Development
23. The application states that the addition of the conservatory would benefit the character of the building through the removal of the existing unsympathetic lean to extension. It is also suggested that the existing extension is too small 7.5 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
for the applicants to enjoy and is failing due to inadequate construction. Whilst it is clear that the existing extension is small and in a poor state of repair this would not be sufficient justification in itself to overcome the harm that would be caused to the building’s historic character that an extension of this size and form in this particular location would cause.
24. In light of the above, I do not consider that sufficient justification has been demonstrated by the applicant in order to overcome the harm to the character and appearance of the listed building. The development would consequently not be in accordance with central and local planning policy guidance and would be therefore be unacceptable.
Residential Amenity
25. Given the small scale, single storey nature of the development the development would not be harmful to the residential amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling through overbearing development or overlooking.
Human Rights Issues
26. I have also taken into account the human rights issues relevant to this application. In my view the “Assessment” section above and the Recommendations below represent an appropriate balance between the interests and rights of the applicant (to enjoy his land subject only to reasonable and proportionate controls by a public authority) and the interests and rights of those potentially affected by the proposal (to respect for private life and the home and peaceful enjoyment of their properties).
Summary
27. The main issues in this case are:-
(a) The development would be unjustified and the proposed size, materials, design, detailing and location would result in an incongruous and unsympathetic form of development that would fail to preserve the historic character and appearance of the listed building to its detriment. PPS5, policy BE6 of the South East Plan (2009).
(b) The development would be harmful to the visual amenity of the area and detract from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, the AONB, the Special Landscape Area and the Landscape Character Area. It would therefore fail to comply with policies CC1, BE6 and C4 of the South East Plan (2009), policy EN27 of the Ashford Borough Local Plan (2000), policies CS1 and CS9 of the adopted Local Development Core Strategy (2008) and policy TRS17 of the Tenterden and Rural Sites DPD (submission document 2010). 7.6 Ashford Borough Council - Report of Development Control Managers Planning Committee 28 April 2010 ______
(c) Impact upon residential amenity. The development would not be harmful to the residential amenity of the occupiers of the nearest residential dwellings through loss of privacy or overbearing development.
Recommendation
That for the following reasons the Planning Committee refuse this application:
On the following grounds:
1. The proposed development would be contrary to policies CC1, C4 and BE6 of the South East Plan (May 2009), policy EN27 of the adopted Ashford Borough Local Plan (2000), policies CS1 and CS9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy 2008, policy TRS17 of the Tenterden and Rural Sites DPD (submission document 2010), adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 10 entitled ‘ Domestic Extensions in Urban and Rural Area’s’ and to Government advice contained in PPS1 and PPS5 and therefore constitutes development contrary to the interests of acknowledged planning importance for the following reasons:
(i) The proposed extension, with no overriding justification having been demonstrated would, by virtue of its size, design, materials, detailing and location not represent a sympathetic addition to this property and would therefore result in an incongruous and inappropriate addition. This in turn would unacceptably harm the essential architectural and historic interest of this important Grade II listed building to its detriment.
2. As a result of (1) above, the proposal would fail to either preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area, the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the Special Landscape Area or the Landscape Character Area and would detract from them.
Note to Applicant
1. None
Background Papers
Comments from Boughton Aluph Parish Council dated 15 February 2010
Contact Officer: Alex Stafford – Telephone: (01233) 330248
7.7 ______Page 1ofAnnex 1toReport 10/00138/AS Planning Committee28 April 2010 Ashford Borough Council
7.8
______Page 2ofAnnex 1toReport 10/00138/AS Planning Committee 2010 28April Ashford Borough Council
7.9
Ashford Borough Council Planning Committee 28 April 2010 Page 1 of Annex 2 to Report 10/00138/AS ______
7.10