APPLICATION NUMBER: WD/D/18/000632

APPLICATION SITE: ELKINS, BUCKLAND NEWTON, DORCHESTER, DT2 7BU

PROPOSAL: Re-thatch roof

APPLICANT: Mr Craig

CASE OFFICER: Charlotte Haines

WARD MEMBER(S): Cllr B Haynes

RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Refuse

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: 1.1. The application property is a Grade II Listed thatched cottage known as ‘Elkins’. The property fronts onto the road within the settlement of Buckland Newton and is within its Conservation Area. Buckland Newton is an historic settlement which has 27 Listed Buildings of which 8 of these Listings include thatched roofs which make a very important contribution to the history and character of Buckland Newton which is itself set within attractive countryside.

1.2. Elkins is a building which dates from the 17th Century and was once used as an Inn. It has whitewashed walls with a hipped thatch roof. The building is also mentioned in the Royal Commission of the Historical Monument, Dorset vol 3. The building is currently thatched with combed wheat reed.

2. DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT:

2.1. The applicant is seeking Listed Building Consent to rethatch the roof with water reed.

3. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY:

Application No. Application Decision Date of decision Description 1/E/92/000217 Dismantle and rebuild A 21 October 1992 and resite brick store, and construct veranda

1/E/96/000615 Develop land by the R 22 January 1997 erection of a house and garage

WD/D/16/002057 Form pitched roof R 11 January 2017 over modern flat roofed extension and erect single storey and two storey rear extensions

WD/D/16/002160 Removal of modern R 11 January 2017 porch (retrospective), form pitched roof over modern flat roofed extension, demolish flat roofed extension, erect single storey and two storey rear extensions, internal alterations and installation of air source heat pump

WD/D/17/001161 Remove modern A 28 June 2017 porch (Retrospective). Demolish flat roof extension. Erect extension. Carry out minor internal alterations. Install air source heat pump.

WD/D/17/001162 Remove modern A 28 June 2017 porch (Retrospective). Demolish flat roof extension. Erect extension. Carry out minor internal alterations. Install air source heat pump.

WD/D/17/002009 Erect extension. A 08 November 2017 (revised scheme)

WD/D/17/002285 Remove modern A 08 November 2017 porch (retrospective). Demolish flat roof extension. Erect extension. Carry out minor internal alterations. Install air source heat pump. (revised scheme)

4. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES: 4.1. National Planning Policy Framework As far as this application is concerned the following sections of the NPPF are considered to be relevant:

Section 4 - Decision-making

The following paragraph within Section 4 is considered relevant:- Paragraph 38 - Local planning authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way. They should use the full range of planning tools available, including brownfield registers and permission in principle, and work proactively with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.

Section 16 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

The following paragraphs within Section 16 are considered relevant:

Paragraph 189 - 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. Where a site on which development is proposed includes, or has the potential to include, heritage assets with archaeological interest, local planning authorities should require developers to submit an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, a field evaluation.

Paragraph 190 - 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 into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise any conflict between the heritage asset’s conservation and any aspect of the proposal.

Paragraph 192 - In determining applications, local planning authorities should take account of: a) the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; b) the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and c) the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

Paragraph 193 - 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 (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.

4.2. Adopted West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015) As far as this application is concerned the following policies of the Local Plan are considered to be relevant:

ENV4 - Heritage Assets

5. HUMAN RIGHTS: 5.1. Article 6 - Right to a fair trial. Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life and home. The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property

This Recommendation is based on adopted Development Plan policies, the application of which does not prejudice the Human Rights of the applicant or any third party.

6. PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITIES DUTY: 6.1. As set out in the Equalities Act 2010, all public bodies, in discharging their functions must have “due regard” to this duty. There are 3 main aims:- • Removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics • Taking steps to meet the needs of people with certain protected characteristics where these are different from the needs of other people • Encouraging people with certain protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where participation is disproportionately low.

Whilst there is no absolute requirement to fully remove any disadvantage the Duty is to have “regard to” and remove OR minimise disadvantage and in considering the merits of this planning application the planning authority has taken into consideration the requirements of the PSED.

7. CONSULTATIONS: 7.1. Buckland Newton Parish Council - Support for the following reasons:-

 Use of wheat straw as a thatching material is not exclusive to the area.  Water reed from the reed beds at Radipole Lake near Weymouth were commonly used as a thatching material in the parish over at least the last 100 years.  Knowledge of at least two listed buildings in the parish which are now thatched in water reed replacing original sourced water reed.  Elkins would be shrouded in tarpaulins for an unknown period of time until good quality straw becomes plentiful again.  Further delay beyond this year would risk further deterioration to this building.  There is no way of knowing whether Elkins was previously thatched in straw or reed prior to its listing; it may well have depended on availability and cost at the time.

7.2. Conservation Officer - Object for the following reasons. The use of Combed Wheat Reed on this rural building is an integral and critical part of its interest, character and history and a change to water reed is not in the best interest of the buildings character and is not supported by good conservation or the thatching report or the advice of Historic England. Therefore, in my opinion, this application should be strongly refused.

8. REPRESENTATIONS: 8.1. None received.

9. PLANNING ISSUES:

 Impact on Listed Building

10. PLANNING ASSESSMENT:

Impact on Listed Building

10.1 When considering the 1990 Act the NPPF requires that special regard be given to the desirability of preserving a Listed Building in para 17; and para 126 draws attention to Heritage Assets as an irreplaceable resource to be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance to ensure they can be enjoyed by this generation and future generations.

10.2 Policy ENV4 states that development should conserve and where appropriate enhance the significance of designated heritage assets. The policy stipulates that any harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset must be justified.

10.3 Section 66 and 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) identify, respectively, that the Local Planning Authority shall have regard to the desirability of preserving listed buildings and its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.

10.4 Paragraph 189 of the NPPF identifies that applicants should describe the significance of any heritage assets affected and paragraph 193 identifies that great weight should be given to the assets conservation. It is further identified in paragraph 194 that any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification and that substantial harm to or loss of a Grade II listed building should be exceptional.

10.5 It is proposed to replace the Combed Wheat Reed Roof of the building with Water Reed. The local vernacular for Buckland Newton and the surrounding area within this part of Dorset is Combed Wheat Reed. The technique for thatching with Combed Wheat Reed differs from thatching with Water Reed. The application of Combed Wheat Read is part of the buildings history and is of great significance to the buildings Grade II listing. The loss of this significant element would cause substantial harm to the character and appearance of the listed building. There is no sufficient justification for the loss of the Combed Wheat Reed thatched roof. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy ENV4 of the Adopted West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015), Section 66 and 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) and paragraphs 189, 194 and 195 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2018.

10.6 The applicant in their submitted heritage statement state the thatched roof is in urgent need of replacement and like for like replacement of good quality combed wheat straw isn't available in the quantities needed for this building due to the previous few wet summers. However, the material that is used on the roof should not depend on one or two poor harvests. The conservation officer advises that if a number of thatchers were contacted then sufficient Wheat Reed of good quality should be found. No evidence has been submitted by the applicant to show that a number of thatchers have been contacted to source Wheat Reed.

10.7 The concern regarding the urgent need of replacement to protect the fabric of the building is noted. However, the conservation officer has advised that the thatch could be patched and if required protected by tarpaulins until a sufficient quantity of good Combed Wheat Reed is available. However, the parish council in their comments supporting the application state that they do not wish to see the roof covered in tarpaulin for an unknown period whilst good quality combed wheat straw is sourced. However, the covering of the roof for a temporary, short term period of time does not justify the permanent replacement with an unsympathetic thatching material.

10.8 Thatched roofs make an important contribution to the character and appearance of rural houses and cottages within Dorset as well as the character and appearance of Conservation Areas. In this case, it is considered that the use of combed wheat reed makes a significant contribution to the character and appearance of Elkins as well as this part of the Buckland Newton Conservation Area. Consequently, the use of combed wheat reed on the roof of Elkins contributes to the significance of the heritage assets by way of its evidential, historical and aesthetic value.

10.9 The use of Combed Wheat Reed on this thatched rural building is a tradition and a characteristic of Elkins and the use and character of Combed Wheat Reed is supported by the Thatching Report - Code of Practice; the preparation of which this authority was involved in. The Thatching Report advises that "Over the whole of this period, until the last 40 years, the material used to thatch buildings was of local origin. Recently however imports of water reed are being used instead of the produce of local farmers. The change in material produces changes in appearance, especially when the techniques used to thatch come from other counties whose traditions involve water reed rather than straw thatches. The pattern and form of ridges, eaves, verges and dormers, and the profile of the roof all contribute to the style of the roof. Where water reed grew in abundance at Abbotsbury, Radipole Lake in Weymouth and near Wareham and Poole, it was harvested for local thatching."

10.10 The report goes on to state that "the other main technique using combed wheat reed was generally found in the Blackmoor Vale and on the western side of the County but is now also seen throughout the County. In this technique the ears are kept together at the top of the bundles or yealms, and the bottom or butts form the external surface of the roof. Whilst wheat was a main material other cereals were also used with these techniques. Thatched roofs made of combed wheat and long straw shall normally be re-thatched in similar materials, not water reed." This clearly demonstrates the importance to the heritage of the buildings as well as to the local area of the continued use of Combed Wheat Reed.

10.11 Listed Building Consent was granted in 2017 (under reference: - WD/D/17/001534) for the replacement from water reed to Combed Wheat Reed at a property in Loders. This demonstrates that combed wheat reed has been in supply to rethatch a property in the last 12 months. There are a number of appeal dismissals for proposals to change from the traditional thatch of the area to water reed across England over the past 14 years. The following examples are for proposals to change from combed wheat reed to water reed.

10.12 A proposal to change from combed wheat reed to water reed on a Listed Cottage in Somerset was dismissed in 2004 (appeal reference: APP/R3325/E/04/1148702) as it was considered that “a change in thatching material must be regarded as harmful to the character of the building” and “a refusal to allow the use of water reed in this case could well help to foster the production of combed wheat reed in this area, and to sustain the local tradition”.

10.13 A similar proposal on a cottage in the New Forest was dismissed in 2008 (appeal reference: APP/B9506/E/08/2092965). This case was in an area where most of the thatched cottages in the area now have water reed coverings and there was a shortage of combed wheat reed after a very poor harvest. However, the inspector considered that “one of the important purposes of listed building protection is to help distinguish the genuine article from imitation”. The inspector concluded that the fact that a number of properties were in water reed only made those roofs thatched in combed wheat reed all the more rare and thus of significant value.

10.14 A further proposal on a cottage in Wiltshire (reference: APP/Y3940/E/13/2207654), the inspector found that the rethatching using water reed would be significantly detrimental to its authenticity and would materially diminish the historic character of the listed building and would have a harmful impact on its value as a heritage asset.” A number of public benefits in retaining the combed wheat reed were also found including “the environmental benefits that would result from the replacement of the existing top coat, including an improvement to the appearance of the appeal building and the Conservation Area, it would have some economic and social benefits, in supporting and sustaining the thatching industry, including the production of materials and the continued development of appropriate methods and techniques.”

10.15 A more recent appeal in 2017 was dismissed for a proposal to change the thatching material from combed wheat reed to water reed to a listed property in Devon (appeal reference: - APP/J9497/Y/17/3177128). The inspector found that “irrespective of other cases where water reed has been used, the use of water reed at Dymonds would introduce a non-traditional material, which would undermine the consistency of materials that are intrinsic to the history of the building itself”. Consequently, the inspector concluded that “allowing the increased proliferation of water reed would therefore harmfully contribute to the decline in a traditional, authentic material”. They found that use of water reed offered an imitation of the appearance of traditional Combed Wheat Reed and “would be harmful to both the special interest and significance of the listed building, as well as to the historic integrity of Dunsford and thereby to the character of the Conservation Area”. The inspector doubted the longevity of water reed and the fact that it was a cheaper alternative did not justify the harm that would occur.

10.16 Turning to the current proposal, the Heritage Statement is limited in its details to justify the use of this material and the works. There is no method statement for the specification of materials for the re-thatching, describing the technique to be employed, such as stripping back to a certain depth, building up layers of new thatch, and the use of a flush ridge. The proposed works will result in the total stripping of a roof, removing all historic layers, including potentially the smoke blackened thatch under-layer. The loss of this archaeology and history would result in considerable harm to the integrity of the listed building and remove a large layer of the historic fabric of the building, which potentially has a high degree of significance.

10.17 Listed Buildings are an irreplaceable resource and it is considered that the use of Combed Wheat Reed on this rural building is an integral and critical part of its interest, character and history of the building. It therefore makes an important contribution to the significance of the building. Therefore, the change to water reed would result in substantial harm to the buildings character and is not supported by good conservation guidance, the advice contained within the thatching report and the advice of Historic England.

10.18 The applicant and Parish both state that properties in the area are thatched in water reed; although no examples of these properties are given. The parish claim that water reed has been sourced from the reed beds at Radipole Lake near Weymouth and was a thatching material in the parish the last hundred years. This is questionable given the distance between Buckland Newton which is part of rural Dorset some distance from Radipole Lake. The Thatching Report advises and guides the use of Combed Wheat Reed in rural areas such as Buckland Newton. In respect of the Weymouth Reed beds, the conservation officer advises that these have not been in use for at least 50 years and would not have provided enough material for Dorset Thatched buildings over the course of time.

10.19 If this application is allowed, it could encourage other persons to come forward with similar proposals to use water reed which would ultimately lead to the loss of a whole tradition and character that goes back hundreds of years. Therefore, the change in thatching material is harmful to the listed building and should be resisted as there is no clear and convincing justification for this harm. Furthermore, as the proposal relates to a private residential property there is no public benefit to outweigh this harm. The proposal fails to comply with Local Plan Policy ENV4 and National Guidance.

11. CONCLUSION/SUMMARY:

11.1 It is proposed to replace the Combed Wheat Reed Roof of the building with Water Reed. The local vernacular for Buckland Newton is Combed Wheat Reed. The technique for thatching with Combed Wheat Reed differs from thatching with Water Reed. The application of Combed Wheat Reed is part of the buildings history and makes an important contribution to the significance of this Grade II Listed Building. The loss of this significant element would cause substantial harm to its historic significance that is not outweighed by any public benefit. There is no sufficient justification for the loss of the Combed Wheat Reed thatched roof. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy ENV4 of the Adopted West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015), Section 66 and 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) and Part 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

12. RECOMMENDATION:

Refuse

The loss of the combed wheat reed is considered to result in substantial harm to the significance of the listed building and there are no substantial public benefits to outweigh this harm. There is no sufficient justification for the loss of the Combed Wheat Reed thatched roof. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy ENV4 of the Adopted West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (2015), Section 66 and 16 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) and Section 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2018, in particular paragraph 196.