HAINAULT HALL,

173 LAMBOURNE ROAD,

CHIGWELL, EPPING FOREST, ESSEX, IG7 6JU

HERITAGE STATEMENT

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION.

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION.

3.0 PLANNING LEGISLATION AND POLICIES.

4.0 THE HERITAGE ASSET - HAINAULT HALL.

5.0 ASSESSING SIGNIFICANCE OF A LISTED BUILDING.

6.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

7.0 IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO THE SETTING OF A GRADE II LISTED BUILDING.

8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION.

PREPARED BY ARCHEXEL

MARCH, 2018

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Hainault Hall is a Grade II listed building. There are outbuildings on site which are listed and are currently being used as a swimming pool and garages.

1.2 The proposal relates to those unlisted outbuildings which are located within the curtilage of Hainault Hall, a Grade II listed building. This heritage statement accompanies an application for pre planning advice submitted to the Epping Forest District Council in support of the proposal that relates to those outbuildings.

1.3 The content in this statement was compiled following extensive research to the Grade II listed building, consideration of previous site planning history or decisions, site visit, relevant planning policy and legislation. The following sections of this statement will discuss these in much more details.

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

2.1 Hainault Hall a detached Grade II listed building is situated on a generous plot to the northern side of Lambourne Road, in Chigwell Parish.

2.3 The site is well setback from Lambourne Road and heavily screened by high mature hedge and TPO trees at rear and side plot boundaries. The site shares the boundary with the Metropolitan Green Belt land at rear boundary.

2.4 The unlisted outbuildings referred to as a "Pool House" is situated to the northern side (rear/side) of the Hainault Hall Grade II building. The proposal which is a subject of this application relates to the "Pool House".

2.5. The properties that surround the site are of varied or mixed character, consisting of predominantly two storey and chalet bungalows with traditional pitched or hipped roof forms. We would specifically want to draw your attention to those properties which adjoin the site to the north. Those adjoining properties are higher than the Pool House.

3.0 PLANNING LEGISLATION AND POLICIES

3.1 Hainault Hall building is a designated heritage asset. Works which affect the character or setting of the property are subject to a range of national and local authority heritage policies in addition to legislation which are presented in the following sections of this statement.

Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990

3.2 The legislative framework for conservation and enhancement of listed buildings and conservation areas are set out in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Section 66 of the Act requires that, ‘ in considering whether to grant planning permission for development that affects a listed building or its setting or whether to grant listed building consent, the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural interest which it possesses’.

National Planning Policy Framework

3.3 The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF) sets out the Government’s planning policies for England and how these are to be applied. The guiding principle of the document is a presumption in favour of sustainable development and the protection and enhancement of the historic environment is embedded in this approach.

3.4 Sustainable development is defined as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the future. Paragraph 7 of the NPPF breaks down this definition into three dimensions; economic, social and environmental. Within the environmental dimension, sustainable development needs to contribute to ‘protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment .’

3.5 Annex 2 also contains the definition of a heritage asset as, a building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. Heritage asset includes designated heritage assets and assets identified by the Local Planning Authority (including local listing).

3.6 There are several paragraphs contained in the NPPF which relate to the historic environment, particularly Paragraphs 126-141 contained in Section 12. Also of relevance is Paragraph 17 in the Core Planning Principles which contains the following:

Conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and future generations.

3.7 The relevant Paragraphs contained in Section 12 are:

Paragraph 128. In determining applications, local planning authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. The level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum, the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed using appropriate expertise where necessary.

Paragraph 129. Local planning authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset) taking account of the available evidence and any necessary expertise. They should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.

3.8 Paragraph 131. 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.

3.9 Paragraph 132. 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. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification.

3.10 Where a development proposal will lead to less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use.

3.11 Paragraph 137 Local planning authorities should look for opportunities for new development within the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance. Proposals that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the asset should be treated favourably.

Local Planning Policies

3.12 Epping Forest District Council has an emerging Local Plan (2016), which when adopted, would supersede the current adopted Local Plan. The relevant Draft Policy of the emerging Local Plan is DM 7 (Heritage Assets); however, due to the current stage of the draft Local Plan, minimal weight has been given to its draft policy or polices relating to heritage assets.

3.13 The relevant policy relating to proposals that might affect the setting of listed buildings is contained in the current adopted Local Plan (1998) and Alterations (2006).

3.14 Policy HC12: Development affecting the setting of listed buildings states, states that, the Council will not grant planning permission for development which could adversely affect the setting of a listed building.

4.0 THE HERITAGE ASSET - HAINAULT HALL

Believed to have been built in the late 18 th century, Hainault Hall was first listed as a Grade II building on the 28 th June 1954; last amendment was on 29 th May 1984. The property was extended in the 19 th century.

4.1 Materials include: Stock bricks, Flemish bond, with dressings of red brick and stone, Mansard roof form, roofed with handmade red clay tiles. Main range aligned approx. NE-SW, aspect SE, with chimney stacks in each gable. Rear wing at NE end with parallel roof, chimney stack and gable to NE, hip to SW.

4.2 Single storey lean-to extension in W angle, 2 storeys with attics and basement. 4.3 Ground floor, central half-glazed door, stucco door case with pedimented head, 6 splayed stone steps with wrought iron railings. 4 double-hung sash windows of 12 lights under flat arches of gauged red brick.

4.4 First floor, 5 similar windows, with stone string course at sill level. Open pediment, full height projection, with moulded stone coping. Moulded stone string course above windows, parapet with stone coping. Mansard roof with 2 double-hung sash windows of 6 lights in flat-roofed dormers. The whole forms a symmetrical front elevation, asymmetrical in plan.

5.0 ASSESSING SIGNIFICANCE OF A LISTED BUILDING

5.1 In accordance with Government policy and Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, Grade II listed buildings are of special interests meriting every effort to preserve them.

5.3 The NPPF defines the significance of a heritage asset as the value of a heritage asset placed on it by current and future generations because of its heritage interest. This interest may be archaeological; architectural; artistic or historical.

5.4 The setting of a heritage asset also contributes to its significance and is defined by the NPPF as the surrounding in which a heritage asset is experienced.

Assessing Setting

5.5 There are two guiding documents produced by Historic England for assessing setting and views, Seeing the History in the View (2011) and The Setting of Heritage Assets: Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning 3 (2015).

5.6 Setting varies from asset to asset and cannot be generically defined. Changes to the setting of heritage assets may be positive as it replaces poor development which has compromised the assets setting. It is likely that the setting of an asset has changed over time from the dynamics of human activity and natural occurrences such as weather.

5.7 The importance setting makes to the contribution to the significance of the heritage asset is often related to how the heritage asset is seen in views, this can include views looking towards the heritage asset or from the heritage asset looking outwards, and may include relationships between the asset and other heritage assets, natural or topographical features. Assets may also be intended to be seen from one another in designed landscapes for aesthetic reasons.

5.8 Seeing the History in the View provides a method for understanding and assessing the significance of heritage in views by identifying and establishing the baseline significance of heritage in views. Having identified the significance of the heritage within views, an assessment of the potential impact of a development proposal on the heritage significance of the identified view. The guidance documents uses values for the importance of heritage assets identified within the view, for the view as a whole and criteria for determining the magnitude or level of impact of a development on the heritage significance within the view. The overall effect is expressed in a range from negligible to major.

5.9 Historic England’s Good Practice Advice 3, The Setting of Heritage Assets (2015), notes a staged approach to proportionate decision-taking, with relevant NPPF paragraphs along with guidance contained in the Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) for their implementation, providing the framework for the consideration of changes affecting the setting of heritage assets which should be assessed proportionately and based on the nature, extent and level of the heritage asset’s significance.

5.10. The Guidance recommends a five step approach to the assessment of the effect of development on the setting of heritage assets as follows:

Step 1: identify which heritage assets and their settings are affected; Step 2: assess whether, how and to what degree these settings make a contribution to the significance of the heritage asset(s); Step 3: assess the effects of the proposed development whether beneficial or harmful, on that significance; Step 4: explore ways of maximising enhancement and avoiding or minimising harm; Step 5: make and document the decision and monitor outcomes.

Assessing Impact

5.11 The NPPF measures the effects on heritage assets to be substantial harm or less than substantial harm however, the NPPF does not quantify this definition. A heritage statement is required to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected by the proposed development and consider the impact on designated heritage assets and effect on non-designated heritage assets.

5.12 The judgement of whether an effect causes substantial harm is based on whether the effect on the individual asset has an effect on the wider historic environment; where the significance of an asset is such that its loss would be detrimental to the understanding of the values of the wider asset type. This may include extensive physical damage to an asset or loss of key features to an asset’s setting. The identification of substantial harm is therefore one of professional judgment.

Significance of Hainault Hall

5.13 Hainault Hall was included into the national register of Statutorily Listed Buildings on the 28 th June 1954. Historic England entry number is 1111204 and heritage category is Grade II. The significance of Hainault Hall has therefore been ascertained by reason of its listing as a Grade II Listed heritage asset.

Archaeological

5.14 The decorative and constructive design elements of the Hainault Hall can be said to have evolved from the classical architecture associated with the principles of Greek and Roman error of classical antiquity. Records from "Images of England database" show that the building was built in the 18 th century and extended in the 19 th century, which therefore provides evidence of a deliberate change and adaptation of this building to probably suite the requirements of its post owners or occupiers.

Historical Value

5.15 Our desktop research of the historic value of Hainault Hall, particularly having regard to the building details or records held by the "Images of England" and "Historic England" did not reveal any association of this building with any notable architect, artists, historic church or any contribution it made to any religious history in the past. In view of this, we have concluded that Hainault Hall was not listed as a heritage asset on grounds of any historical significance or interests.

Architectural or Aesthetic Value

5.16 The architectural value or interest of Hainault Hall is associated with its 18 th century classical architectural style of Victorian period, which is a prominent style of architecture of its period, aesthetically and artistically pleasing in visual terms.

5.17 Its design and materials described under "The heritage asset -Hainault Hall" section of this statement has given this building a positive external appearance which has made it to continuously make contribution to the architectural character and heritage of that part of Chigwell Parish.

5.18 "Images of England" thoroughly describe the special architectural features and materials of interest of Hainault Hall, which have merited its national significance and interest for listing as a Grade II heritage asset.

5.19 In concluding this section, the external appearance of the listed building is largely retained with its special architectural features of interest, which has made its exterior to be of high significance. The major part of the proposed development to the unlisted "Pool House" is subterranean and invisible. The alterations to the garages including the proposed 3M front extension is set back unobtrusively by 6.4 metres from the south facing front wall of the main listed building. Its visibility from a public vantage point, will constitute less or low significance in relation to the main listed building on site.

6.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

6.1 The proposal is to extend and reconfigure the existing garages and pool house. This is an L-shaped one storey building located to the rear (north-east) of Hainault Hall.

6.2 It is proposed to increase the height of the building currently housing the garages, extend it frontwards by 3 Metres and excavate downwards across the new footprint. This will facilitate the introduction or creation of new basement and mezzanine floors across the garage and pool house to provide changing rooms, toilets, sauna, steam room, children’s play area, snooker lounge, home cinema, swimming pool and a gym for the physical fitness, health and well-being of the family.

Existing floor plan above showing footprint

7.0 IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO THE SETTING OF A GRADE II LISTED BUILDING

7.1 Sections 16 and 66 of the Act requires that, ‘in considering whether to grant planning permission for development that affects a listed building or its setting or whether to grant listed building consent, the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural interest which it possesses’.

7.2 The proposal was designed with a view to preserve the setting of Hainault Hall Grade II listed building and the identified special architectural interest which it possesses. This was achieved by ensuring that;

7.3 The front part currently housing the garages is extended by 3Metres. This extension will be unobtrusively set back 6.38Metres from the front wall of the listed Hainault Hall and 1.2 Metres from the rear wall of the adjacent 4 Maypole Drive. It is designed to reflect the material finish and fenestration style of the main building. It will be built with stock bricks and red brick detailing.

7.4 The pool house at the rear will have bi-fold glass doors to open up the new lounge area to the garden grounds of Hainault Hall. The new swimming pool is now located in the basement.

7.5 The treatment proposed to the new gable end at the pool house is more contemporary and reminiscent of the approved elevation (EPF/1998/12) (See Proposed Elevations Drawing No.DS-10).

8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

8.1 Hainault Hall building is of national interest due to the special architectural features it possesses. Its significance is evidenced by its listing as a Grade II heritage asset in the national register.

8.2 The design of the proposal is sensitive to the concerns outlined through earlier reports written by the conservation officer. It adopts several design features of the last approved scheme (EPF/1998/12) excluding the basement and front extension.

8.3 The resulting proposal is a building which respects the hierarchy on the site. The roof and eaves heights over the pool area are maintained as existing and the simple choice of roof form would respect and reflect the site and the listed building.

8.4 The proposed development related to the unlisted structures which are located to the rear of the listed building would have minimal visibility from any public vantage point and would not dominate any prominent part or elevation of the Grade II listed building. The resultant building would remain an ancillary building that would be sympathetically subservient within this sensitive curtilage of Hainault Hall Grade II listed building.

8.5 The proposal has therefore been designed to sufficiently preserve a listed building and its setting and the special architectural interest it possesses as identified in the body of this heritage statement. In the light of this, the proposal would not be contrary to Section 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Area) Act (1990), Policy H12 of the adopted Local Plan (1998) and Alterations (2006) and guidance in the NPPF.