Application Number WD/D/18/000632
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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.