September 2018

Planning Support Statement Newfield Edge Hall Farm, Road, , BB7 4JN

Change of use of garage / ancillary residential building to a single dwelling and replacement of the indoor swimming pool with a single dwelling.

Job No: 17/L/003

Version: 1

Prepared by: Matthew Wyatt MRTPI

Contents

1 | Introduction 2 | Site Characteristics 3 | Design and Access Statement 4 | Development Plan for the 5 | Other Material Considerations 6 | Planning Considerations 7 | Conclusions

APPENDICES

1 | Historic Aerial Photographs of the Newfield Edge Hall Farm.

1. Introduction

1.1 This Statement has been prepared by JWPC Chartered Town Planners in support of an application for planning and listed building consent, seeking the conversion and replacement of ancillary residential outbuildings at Newfield Edge Hall Farm, Burnley Road, Gisburn, to form 2 no. self- contained dwellings. The following chapters provide an overview of the site characteristics, proposed development and relevant planning policies to demonstrate why planning permission should be approved.

1.2 In addition to the requisite forms and site location plan, this Statement should be considered alongside the:

• Full set of plans and elevations by SPA Architects; • Heritage Statement by Emma Adams & Partners; • Tree Report by Yew Tree and Gardens; • Landscape Plans by Yew Tree and Gardens; • Landscape and Visual Assessment by Yew Tree and Gardens; • Extended Phase I Biodiversity Report by Simply Ecology; and • Structual Assessment by JWPC Chartered Town Planners.

1.3 Bearing in mind the LPA’s duty under Para 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework), it is requested that the Agents (JWPC Chartered Town Planners) are contacted in the first instance if any further information is required to enable a positive determination. The Applicant also requests the opportunity to review any proposed draft conditions prior to the release of a decision.

4 Page

2. Site Characteristics

Site and Surroundings

2.1 The planning application site comprises a small complex of buildings located off a private driveway, approximately 200m to the east of Burnley Road (the A682). It is approximately 2.5 miles south of the village of Gisburn and an equal distance to the west of , which is the nearest principal town (within the of Pendle). Further to the south along the A682 is the settlement of , which provides further services and connections to the M65 motorway. Together, these settlements provide access to services, including supermarkets, schools and medical facilities etc.

2.2 A public right of way passes the south-eastern boundary of the site, which leads from the A682 in the west towards Barnoldswick in the east.

2.3 The A682 also forms part of the No. 67 bus route (Barrowford – Barley – – ). Services run every hour throughout the day. A wide range of other regular bus services are available from the nearest settlements, Gisburn and Barnoldswick. Amongst others, these provide public transport links to Skipton, Clitheroe, , Nelson, Burnley, and Preston.

2.4 The complex of buildings that is subject to the current application is the location of a historic farm. Centrally within the complex is a large mid-eighteenth-century dwellinghouse, which has been extended on numerous occasions. Within the curtilage and to the north-east of the dwelling is a large former barn which has been extended and converted into ancillary accommodation, providing a garage, conservatory, home office and games room. To the north is a large private indoor swimming pool with a contemporary appearance and tennis court. To the south-west of the farmhouse is a further two-storey cottage, which is in residential occupation.

2.5 The house is subject to a Grade II Listing. Matters of historic significance are further discussed within the Heritage Assessment by Emma Adams & Partners. As detailed within this report, there are numerous elements of existing buildings, which have been extended and altered, that are currently harmful to the significance and setting of the heritage asset. In places the additions are considered to have no visual relationship with the farmhouse.

5 Page

2.6 The site features many existing trees which provide an element of screening from lower levels. They are a source of amenity for the existing occupants of the complex and also provide some protection from the elements, in a relatively exposed location, with the local topography steadily increasing from east to west.

Planning History

2.7 The Applicant purchased the site and moved into the farmhouse in 2014 and has undertaken only basic maintenance work within the site since this time.

2.8 A search of historic planning and listed building applications relating to the site was undertaken in May 2018. Planning approvals between 1984 and 2008 were generally limited to extensions and conservatories for existing buildings. There was no record of the principal approval for either the existing internal swimming pool, or the former barn which is in ancillary residential use, although they are referred to within reports prepared by the LPA to accompany the determination of applications. It is therefore assumed that these buildings benefit from the appropriate planning and listed building consents.

2.9 The Applicant has also obtained a number of aerial photographs of the site, which are provided at Appendix 1 of this Statement. The specific date of the photographs is unknown. However, they demonstrate the evolution of the site from the early 80s to the late 90s, with the extension / alterations to the former barn, extensions to the residential curtilage, provision of an open air swimming pool, construction of the internal pool building and provision of the tennis court.

6 Page

3. Design and Access Statement

3.1 The current application seeks planning and listed building consent for the change of use of the former barn and the replacement of the indoor swimming pool to create 2 no. self-contained dwellings.

The Former Barn

3.2 External alterations are proposed to the former barn, with a view to providing attractive residential accommodation and enhancing the significance of this feature and its visual relationship with the farmhouse.

3.3 To the south elevation, the key element of works is to replace the existing poorly detailed artificial facing to the extension with cedar cladding with render below, in order to soften the appearance of the building wall. The modern-proportioned upper floor picture window will be replaced with three small windows of a proportion more appropriate to a former agricultural building. Windows will be replaced with timber frames, again appropriate to the historic setting. The existing slate roof will be retained with a further conservation style roof-light inserted.

3.4 Works to the western elevation seek to improve the aesthetic of the building, replacing poorly detailed existing features. This includes the use of cedar cladding with render below to the previously extended part of the building. The domestic garage doors will be replaced with a hardwood timber screen with opening windows. A feature door will also be created and all ground floor openings will be improved through the insertion of new stone lintels. Conservation-style roof- lights will be inserted into the slate roof.

3.5 At the eastern elevation, the applications propose the removal of the exiting UPVC conservatory extension so that the building wall returns to its original simplicity. Where necessary, the wall will be replaced with stone to match the existing. A wooden door will also be inserted.

3.6 The northern elevation is where the most change is proposed. However, this is the elevation of the least historic merit, which is dominated by the stark, modern extension to the right and the conservatory to the left. As discussed above, the UPVC conservatory will be removed to re- emphasise the traditional proportions of the building. The modern and currently unsympathetic

7 Page

extension will be adapted in a contemporary manner to provide openings to the first floor, in the form of bi-folding doors with Juliet balconies. This will afford future occupants excellent views through the gap between the trees, over the open fields beyond the site.

3.7 The proposed internal arrangements reflect the existing layout, albeit with the insertion of a number of new internal doors and stud walling. The design has specifically sought not to harm the significance of the internal design, which in sections includes the original building walls of the former barn.

3.8 Careful attention has been paid to ensuring that the change of use will promote good standards of residential amenity. This is helped by the intention to reduce the size of the windows to the first floor of the southern elevation and ensuring that the focus of larger openings is to the north.

3.9 The key areas of residential curtilage are also located to the north of the building, which benefits from privacy and separation from both the farmhouse and existing swimming pool building. There is no need for landscaping to this particular area, which already benefits from a patio. The submitted site plans also demonstrate how in addition to the internal garage, space exists outside the building for the parking of two vehicles.

The Swimming Pool Building

3.10 The design of the dwelling intended to replace the existing swimming pool deliberately follows the scale and proportions of the existing building, which already has a contemporary appearance. The existing topography is retained to ensure that the building is no more prominent, yet improvements to the appearance are secured through the implementation of a simpler design and the use of appropriate materials.

3.11 Its walls will be constructed of a stone intended to match that of the existing farmhouse and original sections of the former barn. A chimney will be constructed of a contrasting but sympathetic stone. The building will continue to utilise grey tiles to the roof, with a number of roof-lights inserted.

3.12 Window and door openings will consist of aluminium frames and in sections will include bi-folding doors. The western elevation will benefit from the inclusion of a private garage. Window openings to the eastern elevation will be reduced in size to lessen any prominence in viewpoints from the farmhouse.

8 Page

3.13 The internal layout places rooms that will be the focus of residential activity (including the kitchen, dining and living rooms) to the western part of the building, which will benefit from the most sunlight and outlook over the garden. Bedrooms are located towards the east, which will benefit from rear windows and roof-lights. The design also incorporates a private garage, which is located at the point nearest to the access to the property.

3.14 The existing tennis court will be replaced with a lawn turf, with an area of patio provided outside of the western building wall, with steps between the two areas. To facilitate vehicular access, a new driveway will be created from the existing drive towards the farmhouse. The Applicant is willing to discuss the most appropriate hard surfacing.

3.15 Whilst the provision of the access will require the removal of some trees, considered to be of a low amenity value, the application includes a detailed planting scheme for the land to the north- west of the swimming pool. This will help to soften views towards the site and screen the new driveway. All other trees to the northern, north-eastern and eastern boundaries will be retained and will continue to provide a source of amenity, privacy and also shelter from the wind.

9 Page

4. Development Plan for the Ribble Valley

4.1 Under the 2004 Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, planning applications are required to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Development Plan consists of the adopted Ribble Valley Core Strategy and the Ribble Valley Districtwide Local Plan. A detailed review of planning policies relating to heritage assets is contained within the Heritage Statement by Emma Adams & Partners.

Ribble Valley Core Strategy (2014)

4.2 Key Statement DS2: Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development sets out that when considering development proposals the Council will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. It will always work proactively with applicants jointly to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible, and to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions in the area.

4.3 Key Statement EN4: Biodiversity and Geology states that the Council will seek wherever possible to conserve and enhance the area’s biodiversity and geodiversity, avoid the fragmentation and isolation of natural habitats and help develop green corridors. Negative impacts on biodiversity through development proposals should be avoided. Development proposals that adversely affect a site of recognised environmental or ecological importance will only be permitted where a developer can demonstrate that the negative effects of a proposed development can be mitigated or, as a last resort, compensated for.

4.4 Within Key Statement H1: Housing Provision the Council set a commitment to deliver 5,600 dwellings over the plan period (2008 – 2028). It moreover sets an average annual completion target of at least 280 dwellings per year.

4.5 Policy DMG1: General Considerations states that all development must (amongst other considerations) be of a high standard of building design; be sympathetic to existing and proposed land uses in terms of its size, intensity and nature as well as scale, massing, style, features and

10 Page

building materials; ensure safe access can be provided which is suitable to accommodate the scale and type of traffic likely to be generated; and achieve efficient land use and the re-use and remediation of previously developed sites where possible.

4.6 Under Policy DME2: Landscape and Townscape Protection, development proposals which significantly harm important landscape or landscape features will be refused.

4.7 Policy DME3: Site and Species Protection and Conservation sets out that development proposals that are likely to adversely affect wildlife species protected by law will not be granted permission.

4.8 Policy DME6: Water Management confirms that all applications for planning permission should include details for surface water drainage and means of disposal based on sustainable drainage principles.

4.9 Policy DMH3: Dwellings in the Countryside and AONB states that within areas defined as Open Countryside, residential development will be limited to (in this case):

2. The appropriate conversion of buildings to dwellings provided they are suitably located and their forms and general design are in keeping with their surroundings, structurally sound and capable of conversion without the need for complete or substantial reconstruction.

3. The rebuilding or replacement of existing dwellings subject to the following criteria:

• The residential use of the property should not have been abandoned. • There being no adverse impact on the landscape in relation to the new dwelling. • The need to extend an existing curtilage

4.10 Policy DMH4: The Conversion of Barns and Other Buildings to Dwellings states that permission will be granted for the conversion of building to dwellings where:

1. The building is not isolated, i.e. it is within a defined settlement or forms part of an already group of building, and 2. There would be no unnecessary expenditure by public authorities and utilities on the provision of infrastructure, and 3. There would be damaging effect on the landscape or harm to nature conservation interests, and

11 Page

4. No detrimental effect on the rural economy, and 5. The proposals are consistent with the conservation of the natural beauty of the area 6. Existing nature conservation aspects of the existing structure are preserved or adequately mitigated.

4.11 The Policy further states that the building to be converted must also be (in summary):

1. Structurally sound and capable of conversion; 2. Of sufficient size to provide the accommodation without the need for further extensions; and 3. Appropriate to its surrounding and worthy of retention in terms of character and materials; and 4. Has a genuine history of use for agriculture or another rural enterprise.

12 Page

5. Other Material Considerations

National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework)

5.1 National planning guidance is set out within the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) as revised in July 2018, which itself forms a material consideration in planning decisions, particularly where the existing development plan is considered out of date.

5.2 Para 7 of the Framework explains how the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. At Para 8, it is set out that achieving sustainable development means that the planning system has three overarching objectives, which are interdependent and need to be pursued in mutually supportive ways (so that opportunities can be taken to secure net gains across each of the different objectives):

a) An economic objective

b) A social objective

c) An environmental objective

5.3 Para 10 clarifies that at the heart of the Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development so that sustainable development is pursued in a positive way. For decision-taking, Para 11 states this means:

 Approving development proposals that accord with an up-to-date development plan without delay; or

 Where there are no relevant development plan policies, or the policies which are most important for determining the application are out of date, granting permission unless:

i. The application of the policies in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provide a clear reason for refusing the development proposed; or

13 Page

ii. Any adverse impacts of doing so would be significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole.

5.4 Footnote 7 of the Framework clarifies that policies are to be considered out of date when the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites (with the appropriate buffer, as set out in paragraph 73); or where the Housing Delivery Test indicates that the delivery of housing was substantially below (less than 75% of) the housing requirement over the previous three years.

5.5 Para 59 of the Framework clarifies the Government’s objective of significantly boosting the supply of homes.

5.6 Para 78 details that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. Planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services. Where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.

5.7 At Para 79, it is clarified that planning policies and decisions should avoid the development of isolated homes in the countryside unless certain circumstances apply. This includes development that would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset and development that would involve the subdivision of an existing residential dwelling.

5.8 Para 109 confirms that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.

5.9 Through Para 127 it is set out that planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments:

a) Will function well and add to the overall quality of the area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development;

b) Are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping;

14 Page

c) Are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities);

d) Establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit;

e) Optimise the potential of the site to accommodate and sustain an appropriate amount and mix of development (including green and other public space) and support local facilities and transport networks; and

f) Create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well- being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users; and where crime and the fear of crime, do not undermine the quality of life or community cohesion and resilience.

5.10 Chapter 16 of the Framework focuses on conserving and enhancing the historic environment. A detailed review of these policies is provided within the Heritage Assessment which accompanies these applications.

Housing Land Supply Position

5.11 As part of the determination of a recent planning appeal in May 2018, relating to Land at Higher Road, (Ref: APP/T2350/W/17/3186969), an Inspector found that Ribble Valley Borough Council could demonstrate only a housing land supply of 4.5 – 4.7 years.

5.12 The current application affects a designated heritage asset and therefore the ‘tilted balance’ at Para 7 of the Framework is not engaged in this instance. However, significant weight must be attributed to the fact that housing development at the site would make a positive contribution to the supply of homes within the district.

15 Page

High Court Decision: Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

5.13 In Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 2743 (Admin), the Council challenged the decision of a planning inspector that a proposal for new housing in the countryside would not result in new “isolated homes” because “there are a number of dwellings nearby”. Lang J rejected the Council’s case, agreeing with the Secretary of State that the word “isolated” in Para 55 of the Framework (now Para 79) should be given its ordinary, objective meaning. This is a home “far away from other places, buildings, or people; remote” (Oxford Concise English Dictionary).

5.14 The Judgement provides clarification that a proposed new dwelling which is outside a settlement or urban area is not automatically to be considered “isolated” for the purpose of applying Paragraph 55 of the Framework. Thus, in the absence of a five-year supply of housing land, sites which offer benefits under the three strands of sustainability, including enhancing or maintaining the vitality of rural communities, are worthy of positive consideration.

Court of Appeal Decision: Dartford Borough Council v SOS for Communities and Local Government and Others

5.15 Material weight should also attributed to the Court of Appeal Judgement in respect of Dartford Borough Council v SOS for Communities and Local Government and Others [2017] EWCA Civ 141. Within this Judgement, the Deputy Judge considered the definition of previously developed land contained within the glossary (Annexe 2) of The Framework and which includes a number of exceptions. Whilst it has been widely held that residential gardens are an exception, and therefore ‘greenfield’, the Deputy Judge was drawn to the distinction in the glossary which refers to the exceptions including ‘land and built-up areas such as private residential gardens’. He found that only residential gardens within built-up areas were exempt from the definition of previously developed land and therefore residential gardens outside the built-up areas were ‘brownfield’ or previously developed land.

16 Page

6. Planning Considerations

Principle of Development

6.1 The current applications for planning and listed building consent seek the change of use of the existing garages / additional living accommodation and the replacement of the indoor swimming pool as self-contained dwellings at Newfield Edge Hall Farm. Both buildings affected by the applications are currently ancillary to the principal residential use of the farmhouse. Given that sections of the former building comprise a historic barn, it is reasonable to assume that this has a ‘genuine history of agriculture’.

6.2 In light of Dartford Borough Council v SOS for Communities and Local Government and Others [2017] EWCA Civ 141, the residential curtilage of Newfield Edge Hall Farm should be regarded by the LPA as previously developed land. Moreover, as Newfield Edge Hall Farm already comprises a cluster of dwellings and ancillary buildings, the site should not be considered ‘isolated’ in the context of Para 79 of the Framework, as clarified within Braintree District Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWHC 2743 (Admin).

6.3 It is discussed below how in respect of the garages and living accommodation within the historic barn, the building is appropriate in terms of design, structurally sound and capable of conversion without the need for substantial reconstruction. Additionally, there would be no public infrastructure requirements, damaging effect on the landscape or nature conservation, effect or effect on the rural economy. Bearing in mind these factors, the above site characteristics and the implications of case law, the conversion of this building is compliant with Core Strategy Policies DMH3 (criterion 2) and DMH4.

6.4 Regarding the indoor swimming pool building, which is proposed to be replaced, this is in ancillary use and therefore forms part of ‘the dwelling’. The residential use has not been abandoned and there is no need to extend the existing curtilage of Newfield Edge Hall Farm. As discussed further below, the proposals will deliver an improvement to landscape and visual amenities. For these reasons, this aspect of the proposal is consistent with Core Strategy Policy DMH3 (criterion 3).

17 Page

6.5 Whilst the site is not considered isolated for the purpose of applying the Framework, the Applicant is conscious that one form of appropriate development in such areas, as listed at Para 79, are proposals which seek the subdivision of an existing dwelling. Moreover, the Framework seeks for local planning authorities to attribute significant material weight to proposals which are located on previously developed land and re-use existing resources.

6.6 It is also discussed above how the tilted-balance at Para 11 of the Framework is not engaged by virtue of the applications relating to a designated heritage asset. Nevertheless, it is understood that within Appeal Ref: APP/T2350/W/17/3186969 (May 2018), an Inspector found that Ribble Valley Borough Council could not demonstrate a five-year supply of housing land. Regardless of whether this situation changes over the course of the determination period, significant material weight must still be attributed to the positive contribution of the proposal to the supply of homes within the district; particularly as the scheme offers so many other economic, social and environmental benefits and is consistent with the Development Plan for the Ribble Valley, including Core Strategy Key Statement H1.

Enhancement of Heritage Assets

6.7 The applications for planning and listed building consent have been submitted alongside a detailed Heritage Assessment by Emma Adams & Partners. This provides an assessment of the significance of the heritage asset, considers prevailing planning policies at a national level and within the Development Plan and considers the impact of the proposed development in light of these policies.

6.8 The Statement should be considered in full; reviewing each aspect of the proposal. It concludes that the works to the garages / residential accommodation within the former barn reflect the building’s present converted state. Whilst contemporary change is proposed on a peripheral elevation, the works will in parts enhance and in other areas preserve the significance of the heritage asset. It represents the optimum viable use for this asset.

6.9 Likewise, the new-build element of the scheme replaces an existing building with one of similar scale and proportions, utilising well-considered design and materials which sit more comfortably within the setting of the heritage assets.

18 Page

6.10 Overall, it is considered that the scheme as proposed will appropriately conserve and also enhance buildings affected by the applications, as well as the wider setting of Newfield Edge Hall Farm. As such, the proposal is within the spirit of Core Strategy Key Statement EN5, Policy DME4, and Paras 190 – 193 and 200 of the Framework.

Design and Amenity

6.11 The appropriateness of the visual appearance of the design of the properties is considered within the submitted Heritage Statement, which, as discussed above, seeks to conserve and enhance the setting of the Listed Building. This has been carefully balanced by the project architects with the need to ensure that the dwellings are commercially attractive and offer a good level of amenity for existing and future users of the land and buildings.

6.12 Each of the proposed dwellings seeks to focus new openings in locations were they will not lead to an unreasonable degree of overlooking. The internal layout ensures that habitable rooms will benefit from a good level of natural light, outlook and privacy. Each will benefit from private gardens and room for the parking of vehicles.

6.13 The applications have been submitted alongside a structural report which also focuses on the garages / ancillary residential accommodation within the former barn. This confirms how this building currently forms an active part of the household, providing storage space, room for the parking of garages, an office, and leisure and games rooms. Despite the age of the original sections of the barn, the building has been subject to regular upkeep and maintenance, with numerous large additions to the building having taken place during the past century. The submitted layout plans demonstrate that the proposed conversion can be achieved with minimal alteration to the existing layout, with alterations limited to the insertion of a number of new internal doors and stud walling. The building is structurally sound and capable of conversion.

6.14 In light of the above, it is reasonable to conclude that the applications are consistent with Core Strategy Policies DMG1, DMH3 (criterion 2) and DMH4, and Para 127 of the Framework.

19 Page

Highways and Access

6.15 Access to the two new properties will be achieved via the existing driveway from Burnley Road, which is an established access point. The former barn building does not require any further works to facilitate vehicular access and the proposed site plans show the location of 2 no. parking spaces outside the garage. The proposed plan also shows the location of 2 no. spaces for the existing farmhouse and thus demonstrates that there is no potential for vehicular conflict, with plenty of space for cars to manoeuvre safely within the site.

6.16 A new section of driveway is proposed to the dwelling that is proposed to replace the swimming pool. This will branch off to the north from the main existing drive. The plans show how sufficient room also exists to the front of the proposed dwelling to ensure that safe access and manoeuvring can be facilitated.

6.17 It is not considered that the level of additional traffic generated by the site, which will equal a total of 4 no. dwellings, would be of an extent to place undue pressure on the access from Burnley Road.

6.18 In consideration of the above, it is perceived that the applications comply with the relevant part of Core Strategy Policy DMG1 and Para 109 of the Framework.

Landscape Enhancements

6.19 The applications are accompanied by a Tree Report with Arboricultural Constraints Appraisal, Landscaping Plan and a Landscape and Visual Assessment, each by Yew Tree & Gardens. The former documents confirm that it is possible to achieve the development retaining all trees but Group G3 and G5, needed to provide a driveway. These are assessed as currently having a lower amenity value and the Tree Report states that it may be possible to retain some of the smaller trees in these groups.

6.20 Whilst the loss of these trees is regrettable, the landscaping scheme commits the Applicant to replacing the tennis court with a lawn (removing the fencing) and the planting of a selection of new trees to either side of the new section of driveway as compensation.

20 Page

6.21 The submitted Landscape and Visual Assessment sets out how the proposed development site is visible from a number of mainly transient receptors, located within an area of elevated moorland fringe. However, none of the existing buildings at Newfield Edge Hall Farm are visually significant within either the surroundings of the site or the wider landscape.

6.22 The existing dwelling, Newfield Edge Hall, and the detached barn are glimpsed from a limited number of locations. These glimpsed views are of the chimneys and portions of the ridge of the hall and sections of the northern elevation and roofline of the ancillary accommodation within the historic barn. The swimming pool building and tennis court are entirely screened from external views.

6.23 The proposed development is based upon these existing structures, with no significant additions or alterations to the building heights. Consequently, there will be no impact from the swimming pool redevelopment as it will represent a continuation of the impact of the existing site. The formation of the access route will not be visually significant and the provision of additional planting in relation to the enlarged opening in the existing vegetation will further mitigate any potential minor impacts.

6.24 Whilst the barn is significantly screened the Landscape and Visual Assessment details that there may be periods within winter where glimpses of the proposed first floor glazed openings may be visible. However, as these will be glimpsed views which are confined to a limited number of localised transient receptor locations, the magnitude of impact is considered as negligible adverse at most.

6.25 Overall, it is concluded that the proposed development as a result of its design and landscaping will maintain or increase the current level of screening. Nor will the development impact upon the landscape surrounding the site. It will have a neutral impact upon the site and localised receptors. As such, the applications are consistent with Core Strategy Policies DMG1, DME2, DMH3 (criterion 3), DMH4, and Para 127 of the Framework.

Biodiversity

6.26 The current applications are accompanied with an Ecological Appraisal and Bat Survey Report by Simply Ecology. As part of this an Extended Phase 1 habitat survey and bat building inspection was

21 Page

undertaken in July 2017. Two follow-up bat activity surveys were undertaken during August and September the same year.

6.27 The submitted report should be considered in full. However, it concludes that that development sought through the applications is highly unlikely to impact upon designated areas. The inspection revealed that habitats on site are not diverse, with the land and buildings having only a limited ecological value.

6.28 The report details a number of recommendations in order to best protect habitats and protected species. Many of these will need to be followed during the construction phase and post completion. The design of the scheme has sought to minimise the loss of trees, with replacements provided as compensation in order to maintain opportunities for wildlife.

6.29 Bearing in mind the conclusions of the report and measures taken through the design, it is considered that the applications are consistent with Core Strategy Key Statement EN4, Policies DME3 and DMH4, and the Framework.

Flood Risk, Drainage and Utilities

6.30 The land and buildings subject to the current applications are located within Flood Zone 1 (low risk of flooding). Therefore, there is no need for proposed development to be supported with a flood risk assessment.

6.31 The applications propose no overall increase in the amount of buildings on the site. Whilst some minor alterations are proposed to the footprint of the dwelling to replace the swimming pool, the footprint of the historic barn will decrease as a result of the removal of the conservatory. The replacement of the tennis court with a new lawn also significantly reduces the amount of hard surfacing within the site, notwithstanding the provision of the small driveway to the new dwelling. As such, it is perceived that the proposal is likely reduce the overall amount of surface water run-off and the risk of surface water flooding elsewhere.

6.32 All buildings affected by the current applications are already connected to the mains electricity supply. Water is connected via a borehole. The Applicant is willing to accept conditions ensuring that the dwellings are to be drained on separate systems and requiring the further

22 Page

approval of the means of disposing of foul water. It is anticipated that this will be dealt with through the use of bio-disc septic tanks.

6.33 In light of the above, it is considered that the application is consistent with Core Strategy Policy DME6 and the Framework.

Sustainable Development

6.34 Overall, it is considered that the grant of planning and listed building consent will bring numerous important economic, social and environmental benefits, which help to meet the Government’s objectives for achieving ‘sustainable development’, as set out at Para 8 of the Framework. These include:

• A deliverable scheme that will make a positive contribution to the supply of housing within the Borough (social);

• The appropriate re-use of previously developed land and an existing building (environmental);

• An enhancement to the setting of a listed building (social and environmental); and

• Helping to maintain jobs in the construction industry (economic)

6.35 Any potential harms to the landscape and visual appearance of the site, biodiversity or as a result of the loss of trees is adequately mitigated, so that the development will have a neutral impact when assessed against these considerations. Moreover, the scheme promotes good design.

6.36 The proposed development therefore represents a form of sustainable development. Whilst the tilted balance at Para 11 of the Framework is not engaged in this instance, the applications are nevertheless consistent with Core Strategy Key Statement DS2, which confirms that the Council will take a positive approach towards new development proposals, that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The scheme is consequently worthy of approval.

23 Page

7. Conclusions

7.1 This Statement has been prepared in support of applications for planning and listed building consent for the change of use of the ancillary residential accommodation within the former barn and the replacement of the indoor swimming pool, to create 2 no. self-contained dwellings at Newfield Edge Hall Farm, off Burnley Road, Gisburn. The applications have been submitted alongside a full suite of plans and professional reports which investigate and consider relevant material planning considerations.

7.2 In light of the site characteristics, history and recent case law the land should be considered previously developed and not isolated. It has been demonstrated that the conversion of the garages and living accommodation within the historic barn is consistent with Core Strategy Policies DMH3 (criterion 2) and DMH4. The existing indoor swimming pool is within ancillary residential use and therefore forms part of ‘the dwelling’. As such, this element of the proposal is compliant with Core Strategy Policy DMH3 (criterion 3). The Framework moreover attributes significant material weight to proposals which utilise previously development land and existing resources. Indeed, it is noted that even within isolated locations, the Framework is supportive of schemes which subdivide existing dwellings.

7.3 The submitted Heritage Assessment justifies how the change of use of the garages / residential accommodation within the former barn reflects the building’s present converted state. Whilst contemporary change is proposed on a peripheral elevation, the works will in parts enhance and in other areas preserve the significance of the heritage asset. It represents the optimum viable use for this asset. Likewise, the new dwelling that will replace the existing swimming pool building maintains a similar scale and proportions, utilising better design and materials to sit more comfortably within the setting of the heritage assets.

7.4 In addition to considering designated heritage assets, the designs also promote a good level of amenity and ensure safe access, with sufficient parking for existing and future occupants. It is not considered that the proposal will increase surface water run-off and the Applicant is willing to accept conditions ensuring that drainage is provided via separate systems and requiring the further approval of these details.

24 Page

7.5 The application is accompanied by a Tree Report with Arboricultural Constraints Appraisal, Landscaping Plan and a Landscape and Visual Assessment. These demonstrate that as the proposed development is based upon existing structures, with no significant additions or alterations to the building heights, there will be no negative visual impact as a result of building work. The formation of the driveway to the dwelling in the location of the swimming pool will not be visually significant and the provision of additional planting will further mitigate any potential minor impacts as a result of the necessary removal of two small groupings of trees. As such, the development will have a neutral impact upon the site and localised receptors.

7.6 The Ecological Appraisal and Bat Survey Report demonstrated that the proposed development is highly unlikely to impact upon designated areas. Habitats on site are not diverse, with the land and buildings having only a limited ecological value. Recommendations contained within the report will be followed and the scheme has also been designed to ensure the minimal loss of trees, with replacements provided as compensation to maintain opportunities for wildlife.

7.7 Finally, significant material weight should be attributed to the overall economic, social and environmental benefits to be delivered as a result of the scheme. Whilst the tilted balance at Para 11 of the Framework is not engaged in this instance, an Inspector recently found that Ribble Valley Borough Council could not demonstrate a five-year supply of housing land. Regardless of whether this situation changes over the course of the determination period, it is clearly within the interest of the LPA to support housing development which boasts many sustainable attributes and public benefits, including the conservation and enhancement of designated heritage assets. In light of these cumulative benefits, the applications are consistent with Core Strategy Key Statement DS2, which confirms how the Council will take a positive approach towards new development proposals that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

7.8 On the above basis, the applications for planning and listed building consent should be approved in line with the Development Plan for the Ribble Valley, the Framework and the Government’s wider planning objectives.

25 Page

Thank you.

JWPC Ltd

1B Waterview, White Cross Lancaster, , LA1 4XS

Tel: 01524 599980 [email protected] www.jwpc.co.uk

APPENDICES

1 | Historic Aerial Photographs of the Newfield Edge Hall Farm.