Land at Street Farm, Oaksey Built Heritage Statement

Pegasus Group

LAND AT STREET FARM, OAKSEY BUILT HERITAGE STATEMENT

PREPARED BY PEGASUS GROUP ON BEHALF OF HUNTER PAGE PLANNING

P18-1959 | AUGUST 2018 August 2018 | RG | P18-1959

Document Management

Version Date Author Checked/approved by: Reason for revision

Gail Stoten Gail Stoten

1 29.08.2018 - Regional Director Regional Director (Heritage) (Heritage)

Pegasus Group

T 01285 641717 | F 01285 642348 | W www.pegasuspg.co.uk

August 2018 | RG | P18-1959

BUILT HERITAGE STATEMENT

LAND AT STREET FARM, OAKSEY, WILTSHIRE

ON BEHALF OF: HUNTER PAGE PLANNING

PLANNING (LISTED BUILDING AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990

Prepared by: Gail Stoten, Regional Director (Heritage)

Pegasus Group

T 01285 641717 | F 01285 642348 | W www.pegasuspg.co.uk

CONTENTS:

INTRODUCTION 1 SITE DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION 2 METHODOLOGY 4 PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK 9 THE HISTORIC ENVIRONMENT 17 CONCLUSIONS 26

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire

PLATES: PLATE 1 EXTRACT FROM THE OAKSEY TITHE MAP OF 1843, WITH THE LATER STREET FARM COMPLEX ARROWED IN ORANGE...... 2 PLATE 2 EXTRACT FROM THE ORDNANCE SURVEY MAP OF 1900...... 3 PLATE 3 EXTRACT FROM THE ORDNANCE SURVEY MAP OF 1980 ...... 3 PLATE 4 STREET FARMHOUSE, LOOKING NORTH-EAST FROM THE STREET ...... 17 PLATE 5 LOOKING SOUTH TO THE REAR OF STREET FARMHOUSE ...... 17 PLATE 6 LOOKING NORTH-WEST TO THE SOUTHERN FACE OF THE NORTHERN OUTBUILDING ...... 19 PLATE 7 LOOKING SOUTH-EAST TO THE NORTHERN FAÇADE OF THE NORTHERN OUTBUILDING ...... 19 PLATE 8 LOOKING SOUTH TO THE WESTERN END OF THE NORTHERN OUTBUILDING ...... 20 PLATE 9 LOOKING NORTH-WEST TO THE SOUTHERN OUTBUILDING ...... 21 PLATE 10 BLOCKED WINDOWS ON THE SOUTHERN FACADE ...... 22

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire

Summary

The significance of each of the buildings of Street Farm and the Conservation Area as a whole has been considered, and an

assessment made of the proposals for their alteration and conversion. It is the conclusion of the assessment that the proposals will have a minor beneficial effect on the heritage significance of the buildings and enhance the appearance of the

Conservation Area. As such, the proposals are compliant with all legislation and policy.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire

Introduction

Pegasus Planning Group have been commissioned by Hunter In order to inform an assessment of the acceptability of the Page Planning to carry out a Built Heritage Statement of the scheme in relation to impacts to the historic environment, proposed development at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire as following paragraphs 193 to 197 of the NPPF, any harm to the shown on Figure 1. historic environment resulting from the proposed development is also described, including impacts to significance through The proposed development comprises the conversion of farm changes to setting. buildings to a four-bedroom dwelling and ancillary accommodation and garaging to the farmhouse, as well as an As required by paragraph 189 of the NPPF, the detail and access track and minor alterations to the farmhouse. assessment in this Report is considered to be “proportionate to the asset’s importance”. This Built Heritage Statement provides information with regards to the significance of the historic environment to fulfil the requirement given in paragraph 189 of the Government’s

National Planning Policy Framework (the NPPF1) which requires:

“an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting.”

1 NPPF, DCLG, 2018

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 1

Site Description and Location

The site comprises the Street Farmhouse, a two-and-a-half storey stone dwelling; two single-storey outbuildings/barns to the west; and two paddocks to the north of the farm complex.

The existing access into the site is between the southern outbuilding range and the farmhouse.

Site Development

The earliest available detailed cartographic source, the Tithe Map of the parish of Oaksey of 1843, shows that the site was part of a house, garden, buildings and yard complex owned and held in hand by Abel Cole. The land to the north of the complex, where the access track is proposed, was part of land owned by Frances Salisbury, and rented out to Abel Cole as were several other fields.

This source shows buildings in the locations of the existing farmhouse and northern barn range (Plate 1, orange arrows),

but not the southern barn range, where other buildings were present at this time (Plate 1, blue arrow). Plate 1 Extract from the Oaksey Tithe Map of 1843, with the later Street Farm complex arrowed in orange.

No changes to the building of the site are depicted on the Ordnance Survey Map of 1875, but the construction of the southern barn range is visible on the Ordnance Survey map of 1900 (Plate 2).

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 2

Plate 2 Extract from the Ordnance Survey map of 1900. Plate 3 Extract from the Ordnance Survey map of 1980

It is clear form this mapping that the complex originally Planning Background

extended further to the west, into the area now occupied by Previously, application N/95/00981/FUL granted planning Cargill Place. These western barns appear to be replaced by permission for the change of use of the cow shed from large, modern barns by 1980 (Plate 3), and were replaced by agricultural/ private garage to car repair workshop. This was st houses very early in the 21 century. subsequently renewed under applications N/97/1137/S73 and N/00/00770/S73A.

The proposed scheme was previously submitted as application 17/12512/FUL. This was refused, with one reason for refusal relating to heritage issues. This is further discussed below.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 3

Methodology

The aims of this Built Heritage Statement are to assess the • Aerial photographs and satellite imagery. heritage significance of the buildings within the site and the Assessment of significance contribution it makes to the Oaksey Conservation Area, and to

identify any harm or benefit to them which may result from the In the NPPF, heritage significance is defined as:

implementation of the development proposals, along with the “The value of a heritage asset to this and future level of any harm caused if relevant. generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, Site Visit architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s A site visit was undertaken by Pegasus Group on 3rd July 2018, physical presence, but also from its setting.”

during which the site and its surrounds were assessed. Historic England’s Historic Environment Good Practice advice in

The visibility on this day was clear. Surrounding vegetation was Planning Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision Taking in the 2 not fully in leaf at the time of the site visit and thus a clear Historic Environment (henceforth referred to as ‘GPA 2: indication as to potential intervisibility between the Site and the Managing Significance’) gives advice on the assessment of surrounding areas could be established. significance as part of the application process. It advises understanding the nature, extent, and level of significance of a Sources heritage asset. In order to do this, GPA 2: Managing Significance The following key sources have been consulted as part of this also advocates considering the four types of heritage value an assessment: asset may hold, as identified in Historic England’s Conservation

3 • The National Heritage List for England; Principles ; evidential, historical, aesthetic and communal. These essentially cover the heritage ‘interests’ given in the • Online historic mapping (including the Tithe Map); and glossary of the NPPF, which comprise archaeological,

2 Historic England, 2015, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning 3 English Heritage 2008 Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance for the Note 2: Managing Significance in Decision Taking in the Historic Environment Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 4

architectural, artistic and historic interest. acknowledged commemorative or symbolic value that reflects the meaning of the place, or Conservation Principles provides further information on the through more informal social value as a source of identity, distinctiveness, social interaction heritage values it identifies: and coherence. Spiritual value may also be part of communal value. Evidential value: the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity. This value Significance results from a combination of any, some or all of is derived from physical remains, such as archaeological remains, and genetic lines. the values described above.

Historical value: the ways in which past people, Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas are generally events and aspects of life can be connected designated for their special architectural and historic interest. through a place to the present - it tends to be illustrative or associative. Illustrative value is Scheduling is predominantly, although not exclusively, the perception of a place as a link between past associated with archaeological interest. and present people and depends on visibility. It has the power to aid interpretation of the past Setting and significance through making connections with and providing insights into past communities and As defined in the NPPF: their activities through shared experience of a place. By contrast, associative value need not necessarily be legible at an asset, but gives a “Significance derives not only from a heritage particular resonance through association with asset’s physical presence, but also from its 4 a notable family, person, event or movement. setting. ”

Aesthetic value: the ways in which people draw Setting is defined as: sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place. Aesthetic values can be the result of “The surroundings in which a heritage asset is conscious design or fortuitous outcome or a experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may combination of the two aspects. The latter can change as the asset and its surroundings result from the enhancement of the appearance evolve. Elements of a setting may contribute to of a place through the passage of time. the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be 5 Communal value: the meanings of a place for neutral.” the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their collective experience or Therefore, setting can contribute to, affect an appreciation of memory. This can be through widely

4 NPPF Annex 2, DCLG, 2018 5 Ibid

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 5

significance or be neutral with regards to heritage values. to the significance of the heritage asset(s) or allow significance to be appreciated’. The guidance includes a (non-exhaustive) It is also important to note that whilst a physical or visual check-list of elements of the physical surroundings of an asset connection between a heritage asset and its setting will often that might be considered when undertaking the assessment exist, it is not essential or determinative. This was recently including, among other things: topography, other heritage considered in a High Court Judgement6 where it was concluded assets, green space, functional relationships and degree of that: change over time. It also lists points associated with the “The term setting is not defined in purely visual experience of the asset which might be considered, including: terms in the NPPF which refers to the “surroundings in which a heritage asset is views, intentional intervisibility, tranquillity, sense of enclosure, experienced”. The word “experienced” has a land use, accessibility and rarity. broad meaning, which is capable of extending beyond the purely visual”. Step 3 is to assess the effect of the proposed development on

Assessing change through alteration to setting the significance of the asset(s). Step 4 is to explore ways to ‘maximise enhancement and avoid or minimise harm’. Step 5 is How setting might contribute to these values has been assessed to ‘make and document the decision and monitor outcomes’. within this report with reference to Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 (Second Edition): The Setting Descriptions of significance will naturally anticipate the ways in of Heritage Assets7 (henceforth referred to as GPA 3: The which impacts will be considered. Hence descriptions of the significance of Conservation Areas will make reference to their Setting of Heritage Assets), particularly the checklist given on special interest and character and appearance, and the page 11. This advocates the clear articulation of ‘what matters significance of Listed Buildings will be discussed with reference and why’. to the building, its setting and any features of special In GPA 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets, a stepped approach is architectural or historic interest which it possesses. recommended, of which Step 1 is to identify which heritage Levels of significance assets and their settings are affected. Step 2 is to assess ‘whether, how and to what degree settings make a contribution In accordance with the levels of significance articulated in the

6 EWHC 1456, Steer v. Secretary of State for Communities and Local 7 Historic England, 2017, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Government, Catesby Estates Limited, Amber Valley Borough Council, 2017. Note 3 (Second Edition): The Setting of Heritage Assets

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 6

NPPF, three levels of significance are identified: Assessment of harm

• Designated heritage assets of the highest Assessment of any harm will be articulated in terms of the policy significance, as identified in paragraph 194 of and law that the proposed development will be assessed against, the NPPF comprising Grade I and II* Listed buildings, Grade I and II* Registered Parks and such as whether a proposed development preserves or enhances Gardens, Scheduled Monuments, Protected the character or appearance of a Conservation Area, and Wreck Sites, World Heritage Sites and Registered Battlefields (and also including articulating the scale of any harm in order to inform a balanced some Conservation Areas) and non-designated judgement/weighing exercise as required by the NPPF. heritage assets of archaeological interest which are demonstrably of equivalent significance to In order to relate to key policy, the following levels of harm may Scheduled Monuments, as identified in footnote 63 of the NPPF; potentially be identified:

• Designated heritage assets of less than the • Substantial harm or total loss. It has been highest significance, as identified in paragraph clarified in a High Court Judgement of 20139 194 of the NPPF, comprising Grade II Listed that this would be harm that would ‘have such buildings and Grade II Registered Parks and a serious impact on the significance of the asset Gardens (and also some Conservation Areas); that its significance was either vitiated and altogether or very much reduced’; and

• Non-designated heritage assets. Non- • Less than substantial harm. Harm of a lesser designated heritage assets are defined within level than that defined above. the Government’s Planning Practice Guidance as “buildings, monuments, sites, places, areas It is also possible that development proposals will cause no or landscapes identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning harm or preserve the significance of heritage assets. A High decisions but which are not formally designated Court Judgement of 2014 is relevant to this10. This concluded heritage assets8”. that with regard to preserving the setting of a Listed building or Additionally, it is of course possible that sites, buildings or areas preserving the character and appearance of a Conservation have no heritage significance. Area, ‘preserving’ means doing ‘no harm’.

8 DCLG, Planning Practice Guidance, Paragraph: 039 (ID: 18a-039-20140306, 10 EWHC 1895, R (Forge Field Society, Barraud and Rees) v. Sevenoaks DC, West Revision date: 06 03 2014) Kent Housing Association and Viscount De L’Isle 9 EWHC 2847, R DCLG and Nuon UK Ltd v. Bedford Borough Council

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 7

Preservation does not mean no change; it specifically means no assets by taking their settings into account need not prevent harm. GPA 2: Managing Significance states that “Change to change”. heritage assets is inevitable but it is only harmful when Additionally, it is also important to note that, as clarified in the significance is damaged”. Thus, change is accepted in Historic Court of Appeal12, whilst the statutory duty requires that special England’s guidance as part of the evolution of the landscape and regard should be paid to the desirability of not harming the environment. It is whether such change is neutral, harmful or setting of a Listed Building, that cannot mean that any harm, beneficial to the significance of an asset that matters. however minor, would necessarily require planning permission As part of this, setting may be a key consideration. For an to be refused. evaluation of any harm to significance through changes to Benefits setting, this assessment follows the methodology given in GPA 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets, described above. Again, Proposed development may also result in benefits to heritage fundamental to the methodology set out in this document is assets, and these are articulated in terms of how they enhance stating ‘what matters and why’. Of particular relevance is the the heritage values and hence the significance of the assets checklist given on page 13 of GPA 3: The Setting of Heritage concerned.

Assets.

It should be noted that this key document states that:

“setting is not itself a heritage asset, nor a heritage designation”11

Hence any impacts are described in terms of how they affect the significance of a heritage asset, and heritage values that

contribute to this significance, through changes to setting.

With regards to changes in setting, GPA 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets states that “conserving or enhancing heritage

11 Historic England, 2017, Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning 12 Palmer v Herefordshire Council & Anor [2016] EWCA Civ 1061 (4th November Note 3 (Second Edition): The Setting of Heritage Assets 2016)

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 8

Planning Policy Framework

This section of the Statement sets out the legislation and “Parliament in enacting section 66(1) did intend that the desirability of preserving the planning policy considerations and guidance contained within settings of listed buildings should not simply be both national and local planning guidance which specifically given careful consideration by the decision- maker for the purpose of deciding whether relate to the application Site, with a focus on those policies there would be some harm, but should be given relating to the protection of the historic environment. “considerable importance and weight” when the decision-maker carries out the balancing Legislation exercise.”

Legislation relating to the Built Historic Environment is primarily Recent judgement in the Court of Appeal14 (‘Mordue’) has set out within the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation clarified that, with regards to the setting of Listed Buildings, Areas) Act 1990 which provides statutory protection for Listed where the principles of the NPPF are applied (in particular Buildings and Conservation Areas. paragraph 134 of the previous draft of the NPPF, the

Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation requirements of which are now given in paragraph 196 of the Areas) Act 1990 states that: revised NPPF, see below), this is in keeping with the requirements of the 1990 Act. “In considering whether to grant planning permission [or permission in principle] for Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as Areas) Act 1990 states that: the case may be, the Secretary of State, shall have special regard to the desirability of “In the exercise, with respect to any preserving the building or its setting or any buildings or other land in a conservation features of special architectural or historic area, of any powers under any of the interest which it possesses.” provisions mentioned in subsection (2), special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the In the 2014 Court of Appeal judgement in relation to the character or appearance of that area.” Barnwell Manor case13, Sullivan LJ held that:

13 East Northamptonshire District Council v SSCLG (2015) EWCA Civ 137 14 Jones v Mordue Anor (2015) EWCA Civ 1243

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 9

Notwithstanding the statutory presumption set out within the development (the ‘presumption’) sets out the tone of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservations Area) Act 1990, Government’s overall stance and operates with and through the Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act other policies of the NPPF. Its purpose is to send a strong signal 2004 requires that all planning applications are determined in to all those involved in the planning process about the need to accordance with the Development Plan unless material plan positively for appropriate new development; so that both considerations indicate otherwise. plan making and development management are proactive and driven by a search for opportunities to deliver sustainable National Policy Guidance development, rather than barriers. Conserving historic assets in The National Planning Policy Framework (July 2018) a manner appropriate to their significance forms part of this National policy and guidance is set out in the Government’s drive towards sustainable development.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in July The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the 2018. This replaced and updated the previous National Planning achievement of sustainable development and the NPPF sets out Policy Framework 2012. The NPPF needs to be read as a whole three ‘objectives’ to facilitate sustainable development: an and is intended to promote the concept of delivering sustainable economic objective, a social objective, and an environmental development. objective. The presumption is key to delivering these ambitions, The NPPF sets out the Government’s economic, environmental by creating a positive pro-development framework which is and social planning policies for England. Taken together, these underpinned by the wider economic, environmental and social policies articulate the Government’s vision of sustainable provisions of the NPPF. The presumption is set out in full at development, which should be interpreted and applied locally to paragraph 11 of the NPPF and reads as follows:

meet local aspirations. The NPPF continues to recognise that the “Plans and decisions should apply a planning system is plan-led and that therefore Local Plans, presumption in favour of sustainable development. incorporating Neighbourhood Plans, where relevant, are the starting point for the determination of any planning application, For plan-making this means that: including those which relate to the historic environment. • plans should positively seek opportunities to meet the development The overarching policy change applicable to the proposed needs of their area, and be sufficiently development is the presumption in favour of sustainable flexible to adapt to rapid change; development. This presumption in favour of sustainable

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 10

• strategic policies should, as a minimum, o any adverse impacts of doing so provide for objectively assessed needs would significantly and for housing and other uses, as well as any demonstrably outweigh the needs that cannot be met within benefits, when assessed against neighbouring areas, unless: the policies in this Framework taken as a whole.” o the application of policies in this Framework that protect areas or However, it is important to note that footnote 6 of the NPPF assets of particular importance applies in relation to the final bullet of paragraph 11. This provides a strong reason for restricting the overall scale, type provides a context for paragraph 11 and reads as follows: or distribution of development in the plan area; or “The policies referred to are those in this Framework (rather than those in development o any adverse impacts of doing so plans) relating to: habitats sites (and those would significantly and sites listed in paragraph 176) and/or demonstrably outweigh the designated as Sites of Special Scientific benefits, when assessed against Interest; land designated as Green Belt, Local the policies in this Framework Green Space, an Area of Outstanding Natural taken as a whole. Beauty, a National Park (or within the Broads Authority) or defined as Heritage Coast; For decision-taking this means: irreplaceable habitats; designated heritage assets (and other heritage assets of • approving development proposals that archaeological interest referred to in footnote accord with and up-to-date development 63); and areas at risk of flooding or coastal plan without delay; or change.” (our emphasis)

• where there are no relevant development The NPPF continues to recognise that the planning system is plan policies, or the policies which are plan-led and that therefore, Local Plans, incorporating most important for determining the application are out-of-date granting Neighbourhood Plans, where relevant, are the starting point for permission unless: the determination of any planning application.

o the application policies in this Heritage Assets are defined in Annex 2 of the NPPF as: Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance “A building, monument, site, place, area or provides a clear reason for landscape identified as having a degree of refusing the development significance meriting consideration in planning proposed; or decisions, because of its heritage interest. It includes designated heritage assets and assets

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 11

identified by the Local Planning Authority “In determining planning applications, local (including Local Listing)” planning authorities should take account of:

The NPPF goes on to define a Designated Heritage Asset as a: a) the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage “World Heritage Site, Scheduled Monument, assets and putting them to viable uses Listed Building, Protected Wreck Site, consistent with their conservation; Registered Park and Garden, Registered Battlefield or Conservation Area designated b) the positive contribution that under relevant legislation15” (our emphasis) conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities As set out above, significance is also defined as: including their economic vitality; and

“The value of a heritage asset to this and future c) the desirability of new development generations because of its heritage interest. making a positive contribution to local That interest may be archaeological, character and distinctiveness” architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s With regard to the impact of proposals on the significance of a 16 physical presence, but also from its setting ” heritage asset, paragraphs 193 and 194 are relevant and read

Section 16 of the NPPF relates to ‘Conserving and enhancing the as follows:

historic environment’ and states at paragraph 190 that: “When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a “Local planning authorities should identify and designated heritage asset, great weight should assess the particular significance of any be given to the asset’s conservation (and the heritage asset that may be affected by a more important the asset, the greater the proposal (including by development affecting weight should be). This is irrespective of the setting of a heritage asset) taking account whether any potential harm amounts to of the available evidence and any necessary substantial harm, total loss or less than expertise. They should take this into account substantial harm to its significance. when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise any conflict Any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a between the heritage asset’s conservation and designated heritage asset (from its alteration any aspect of the proposal” or destruction, or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing Paragraph 192 goes on to state that: justification. Substantial harm to or loss of:

15 NPPF, Annex 2 16 IBID

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 12

a) grade II listed buildings, or grade II through appropriate marketing that will registered parks or gardens, should be enable its conservation; and exceptional; c) conservation by grant-funding or some b) assets of the highest significance, form of not for profit, charitable or notably scheduled monuments, public ownership is demonstrably not protected wreck sites, registered possible; and battlefields, grade I and II* listed buildings, grade I and II* registered d) the harm or loss is outweighed by the parks and gardens, and World Heritage benefit of bringing the site back into Sites, should be wholly exceptional” use”

Section b) of the above describing assets of the highest Paragraph 196 goes on to state: significance also includes footnote 63 of the NPPF, which states “Where a development proposal will lead to that non-designated heritage assets of archaeological interest less than substantial harm to the significance of which are demonstrably of equivalent significance to scheduled a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the monuments, should be considered subject to the policies for proposal including, where appropriate, designated heritage assets. securing its optimum viable use”

In the context of the above, it should be noted that paragraph The NPPF also provides specific guidance in relation to 195 reads as follows: development within Conservation Areas, stating at paragraph 200 that: “Where a proposed development will lead to substantial harm to (or total loss of significance “Local planning authorities should look for of) a designated heritage asset, local planning opportunities for new development within authorities should refuse consent, unless it can Conservation Areas and World Heritage Sites, be demonstrated that the substantial harm or and within the setting of heritage assets, to total loss is necessary to achieve substantial enhance or better reveal their significance. public benefits that outweigh that harm or loss, Proposals that preserve those elements of the or all of the following apply: setting that make a positive contribution to the asset (or which better reveal its significance) a) the nature of the heritage asset should be treated favourably.” prevents all reasonable uses of the site; and Paragraph 201 goes on to recognise that “not all elements of a

b) no viable use of the heritage asset itself World Heritage Site or Conservation Area will necessarily can be found in the medium term contribute to its significance” and with regard to the potential

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 13

harm from a proposed development states: achieving public benefits are also key material considerations for application proposals. “Loss of a building (or other element) which makes a positive contribution to the National Planning Guidance significance of the Conservation Area or World Heritage Site should be treated either as The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) substantial harm under paragraph 195 or less than substantial harm under paragraph 196, as launched the planning practice web based resource in March appropriate, taking into account the relative 2014, accompanied by a ministerial statement which confirmed significance of the element affected and its contribution to the significance of the that a number of previous planning practice guidance Conservation Area or World Heritage Site as a documents were cancelled. whole” (our emphasis) This also introduced the national Planning Practice Guidance With regards to non-designated heritage assets, paragraph 197 (PPG) which comprised a full and consolidated review of of NPPF states that: planning practice guidance documents to be read alongside the “The effect of an application on the significance NPPF. of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining the The PPG has a discrete section on the subject of ‘Conserving and application. In weighing applications that directly or indirectly affect non-designated enhancing the historic environment’ which confirms that the heritage assets, a balanced judgement will be consideration of ‘significance’ in decision taking is important and required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage states: asset.” “Heritage assets may be affected by direct Overall, the NPPF confirms that the primary objective of physical change or by change in their setting. Being able to properly assess the nature, extent development management is to foster the delivery of and importance of the significance of a heritage sustainable development, not to hinder or prevent it. Local asset, and the contribution of its setting, is very important to understanding the potential Authorities should approach development management impact and acceptability of development decisions positively, looking for solutions rather than problems proposals17” so that applications can be approved wherever it is practical to In terms of assessment of substantial harm, the PPG confirms do so. Additionally, securing the optimum viable use of sites and

17 PPG, paragraph 009 (ID: 18a-009/20140306 revision date 06.03.2014)

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 14

that whether a proposal causes substantial harm will be a Local Planning Policy judgement for the individual decision taker having regard to the Planning applications within Wiltshire are currently considered individual circumstances and the policy set out within the NPPF. against the policy and guidance set out within the Core Strategy It goes on to state: (adopted January 2015) and the saved policies of the North “In general terms, substantial harm is a high Wiltshire Local Plan. test, so it may not arise in many cases. For example, in determining whether works to a The Core Strategy contains the following policy relating to the listed building constitute substantial harm, an historic environment: important consideration would be whether the adverse impact seriously affects a key element of its special architectural or historic interest. Policy CP58 Ensuring the conservation of the It is the degree of harm to the asset’s historic environment significance rather than the scale of the development that is to be assessed. The harm Development should protect, conserve and may arise from works to the asset or from where possible enhance the historic development within its setting18. environment.

Designated heritage assets and their settings While the impact of total destruction is obvious, will be conserved, and where appropriate partial destruction is likely to have a enhanced in a manner appropriate to their considerable impact but, depending on the significance, including: circumstances, it may still be less than substantial harm or conceivably not harmful at all, for example, when removing later i. nationally significant archaeological remains inappropriate additions to historic buildings which harm their significance. Similarly, works ii. World Heritage Sites within and adjacent to that are moderate or minor in scale are likely to Wiltshire cause less than substantial harm or no harm at all. However, even minor works have the iii. buildings and structures of special potential to cause substantial harm” (our architectural or historic interest emphasis) iv. the special character or appearance of conservation areas

v. historic parks and gardens

18 PPG, paragraph 017 (ID: 18a-017-20140306 revision date 06.03.2014)

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 15

vi. important landscapes, including registered battlefields and townscapes. Distinctive elements of Wiltshire’s historic environment, including non-designated

heritage assets, which contribute to a sense of local character and identity will be conserved,

and where possible enhanced. The potential contribution of these heritage assets towards

wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits will also be utilised

where this can be delivered in a sensitive and appropriate manner in accordance with Core Policy 57 (Ensuring High Quality Design and Place Shaping).

Heritage assets at risk will be monitored and development proposals that improve their condition will be encouraged. The advice of statutory and local consultees will be sought in consideration of such applications.

With regards to the Core Strategy, policy CP58 was adopted

before the NPPF, and does not allow for the balancing exercise to be undertaken. As such, the policy is not considered to reflect

the guidance within the NPPF and thus the weight that can be attached to it in the decision-making process is limited.

No policies relevant to the current proposals are contained in the

saved policies of the Wiltshire Local Plan.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 16

The Historic Environment

This section describes the elements of the historic environment The rear of the building is very plain, with all north-facing which are relevant to this application. Each asset will be elevations mainly blank. Two simple windows are present at described in turn, including an assessment of their overall ground floor level, but this is clearly not a primary façade. significance. Any impact to their significance that would result from the proposed development is then discussed.

Street Farmhouse

Street Farmhouse is a stone-built residence of two-and-a-half storeys. It has an L-Shaped plan, with its main façade facing south onto The Street, with an intervening garden defined by a stone-built wall.

Plate 5 Looking south to the rear of Street Farmhouse

The farmhouse is at least mid-19th-century in date. It has some modest heritage interest due to its historic illustrative value as part of a farmstead of at least 19th-century date, and a small amount of aesthetic value relating to its southern façade. It is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset of modest

Plate 4 Street Farmhouse, looking north-east from The Street value.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 17

This significance is primarily embodied in its fabric, but setting • The removal of part of an external wall at first floor level does make a contribution to is significance. Those elements of to access the roof space of the new lean to. its setting that contribute to its significance are considered to • The replacement of the uPVC windows with timber be: casements. • The remainder of the surviving outbuildings, which give Little historic fabric would be lost. Overall, the proposals would the house legibility as being a farmhouse; not affect the historic illustrative value of the asset, and would • The Street, from where the southern façade can be enhance the aesthetic values, through the replacement of the appreciated, and from where the house is visible in flat-roofed extension and uPVC windows. conjunction with the outbuildings; With regards to setting, the proposals would ensure the long- • The village of Oaksey, in which the farm complex was term maintenance and survival of the associated outbuildings sited and perpetuated. (one of which already has consent for non-agricultural uses). As discussed above, the rear of the farmhouse is currently largely • The agricultural land that was associated with the farm, blank, and does not appear to have been constructed to have although the mid-19th-century mapping demonstrates clear views over the land to the rear, although it is that this was in separate ownership to the house. acknowledged that the proposals include the expansion of two

The proposals see: openings. The proposed trackway and parking is not out of • The replacement of the flat roof rear extension with a keeping with a farm complex, although it would change the Cotswold stone lean-to with dormer window. character of a very small part of the formerly associated agricultural land. Views north from the structure would be • A new Cotswold atone porch on the western elevation. largely unobscured. • The widening of the kitchen window (left on plate 5). Overall, the proposals are considered to have a minor beneficial • The expansion of the window (right on Plate 5) to a effect on the heritage significance of the farmhouse. doorway. Northern outbuilding • The lowering of the wall to the north of the farmhouse. The northern outbuilding is a single storey structure. Its • The removal of internal walls within the kitchen area. southern facade faces south onto the farmyard and is stone-

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 18

built/stone-faced (Plate 6) but the northern façade is largely built of concrete blocks (Plate 7), with only the westernmost element constructed of stone (Plate 8). The southern roof element is covered in Cotswold stone tiles (or replicas) and the northern roof is covered in concrete tiles.

Plate 7 Looking south-east to the northern façade of the northern outbuilding

Plate 6 Looking north-west to the southern face of the northern outbuilding

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 19

aesthetic value, although this is compromised by its northern elevation. Overall it is considered to be a non-designated heritage of very modest significance.

This significance is primarily considered to be embodied in its fabric, but setting does make a contribution to is significance. Those elements of its setting that contribute to its significance are considered to be:

• The farmhouse and southern outbuilding, which give the structure legibility as being part of a farm complex.

• The farmyard, from where the southern façade is visible.

• The Street, from where part of the southern façade can be appreciated in conjunction with the farmhouse.

• Plate 8 Looking south to the western end of the northern outbuilding The village of Oaksey, in which the farm complex was sited and perpetuated. A linear structure is shown in the location of the northern outbuilding on the earliest available mapping of the mid-19th • The agricultural land that was associated with the farm, th century. However, the majority of the structure (eastern part) although the mid-19 -century mapping demonstrates appears to have been rebuilt since then. The small projecting that this was in separate ownership to the structure.

element on the northern side is first shown on mapping of 1980 The proposals comprise: (Plate 3) but is not shown on the latest previous detailed • Alterations to internal partitions and openings in the mapping of 1924. Hence, this building is considered to be largely modern, eastern element of the structure, to create a 20th-century structure, with only the westernmost element living accommodation and a garage. being of potentially earlier construction. • Replacement of concrete tiles on northern roof element As such, the building is considered to have very limited heritage with replica Cotswold stone tiles. significance. It has very modest historic illustrative value as part of a farm complex, albeit largely rebuilt. It also has very modest • Rendering of northern elevation.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 20

• Removal of partitions in the western element of the structure to create a home office, although portions will be retained to allow the legibility of the space as formerly subdivided to remain. The existing doors to the openings will be fixed open.

Overall, the legibility of the structure as a part of a former farm complex will remain. The legibility of the oldest, western element as formerly subdivided will remain, although some loss of fabric will occur. The proposals will see the long-term maintenance and survival of the building and will improve the appearance of its northern façade.

With regards to setting, the proposals would ensure the long- term maintenance and survival of the associated outbuilding

(which already has consent for non-agricultural uses). The Plate 9 Looking north-west to the southern outbuilding proposed trackway and parking is not out of keeping with a farm The building has large barn doors at either end (east and west), complex, although it would change the character of a very small and five small window apertures on it northern and southern part of the formerly associated agricultural land. Views north facades. The window apertures on its southern façade have been from the structure would be largely unobscured. bricked-up with concrete blocks, giving it an unattractive dead- Overall, the proposals are considered to have a minor beneficial eyed appearance (Plate 10). The building has rooflights in the effect on the heritage significance of the asset. northern roof element.

Southern outbuilding

The southern outbuilding is a single-storey structure, constructed parallel to The Street, and hard up against the road. It is stone built with concrete tiles covering a pitched roof.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 21

is significance. Those elements of its setting that contribute to its significance are considered to be:

• The farmhouse and northern outbuilding, which give the structure legibility as being part of a farm complex;

• The Street, from where the southern façade and eastern facades can be appreciated in conjunction with the farmhouse;

• The farmyard, from where the northern façade is visible.

• The village of Oaksey, in which the farm complex was sited and perpetuated.

• The agricultural land that was associated with the farm, although the mid-19th-century mapping demonstrates that this was in separate ownership to the structure.

Plate 10 Blocked windows on the southern facade It is proposed that the barn is converted to a residence. The The building is first depicted on the Ordnance Survey map of eastern and western barn doors will be retained, fixed open, with 1900, and it is of late 19th-century date. the openings glazed. The southern window apertures will be reopened, and glazed with fixed metal units in timber surrounds. The structure has very modest heritage significance through its The rooflights on the northern roof will be replaced with historic illustrative value as part of the Street Farm complex, conservation style roof lights. albeit a later element. Overall, it has modest aesthetic value, but the blocked windows of the southern façade detract from One window on the northern elevation will be expanded to make this. The structure is considered to be a non-designated heritage a doorway. asset of very modest significance. Internally, the space will remain single storey. Some internal The significance of the structure is primarily considered to be partitions will be removed, and the space subdivided. embodied in its fabric, but setting does make a contribution to The proposals will result in some loss of late 20th-century fabric

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 22

but will retain its legibility as a former farm building. The The complex of Street Farm is considered to make a small proposals will greatly improve the appearance of the building, contribution to the overall significance (character and through the reopening of the windows on the southern façade. appearance) of the Conservation Area, as being a farm complex They will also ensure the long-term maintenance and survival of of at least mid-19th-century origin (albeit with later and rebuilt the structure, and the outbuilding to the north. The access elements) and being of some modest aesthetic value. However, proposals will not be visible from this structure. Overall, the the bricked-up windows of the southern outbuilding are proposals are considered to have a minor beneficial effect on the considered to detract from the character and appearance of the heritage significance of the structure. area, due to their dead-eyed appearance.

Oaksey Conservation Area As an area containing several Listed buildings, including the Grade I Listed Church, the Conservation Area is considered to The site lies mostly within the Oaksey Conservation Area (Figure be a designated heritage asset of the highest significance as 1). There is no adopted Conservation Area Appraisal for Oaksey. defined by the NPPF. The Conservation Area covers the historic core of the village, as The significance of the asset is considered to primarily originate well as some fields to the north and south. The village has an in the buildings and spaces within the Conservation Area, east/west linear character overall, with road and cul-de-sacs although setting is considered to contribute to a lesser degree. extending north and south from the main thoroughfare, The Street. The surrounds of the Conservation Area comprise later housing to the north-east and south-west, and agricultural land. In the Notable buildings include the Grade I Listed Church of All Saints, wider vicinity, Oaksey is known locally for having a golf course which has three Listed monuments in its churchyard, and the and airfield. Grade II Listed Tudor House, Oaksey House, and 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11, The Street. Most of these front onto The Street. The portion of the site that lies outside the Conservation Area is considered to make a very small contribution to the heritage Other notable buildings that are not Listed include the school significance of the asset as part of the agricultural surrounds and The Wheatsheaf Pub. The playing fields, which lie between associated with Street Farm. the school and village hall, are a key part of the village. The proposals have been detailed above, but those aspects that The site lies on the northern edge of the Conservation Area, are considered relevant to the consideration of the character and partly within it and partly outside it. appearance of the Conservation Area comprise:

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 23

• The improvement of the appearance of the farmhouse The proposals have previously been refused planning through the replacement of the windows and the flat permission, with one of the reasons for refusal relating to roofed extension; heritage

• The improvement of the appearance of the northern The development is not considered to be a high quality design that relates barn through its rendering and replacement of concrete positively to the built form of the locality tiles. and would result in the less than substantial harm to the historic • The great improvement in the appearance of the character, appearance and setting of this part of the Oaksey Conservation Area and southern outbuilding through the reopening of the the non-designated heritage asset being windows in the southern façade. These are highly visible Street Farm. The identified harm is not outweighed by any public benefit from the main thoroughfare of the Conservation Area. including securing the optimum viable use. Therefore the proposal is contrary to • The long-term maintenance of the outbuildings that will WCS Core Policies 57 (i, iii, iv, vi) and 58, be delivered by the proposals. paragraphs 56, 58, 64, 131, 132, 134, 135 and 137 of the NPPF and Section 72(1) of • The change in character of a small area of agricultural the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. land to access trackway and parking. Such uses are typical for the vicinity of a farm complex, and an existing As discussed above, the proposals are considered to have trackway provides access to the houses or Cargill Place beneficial effects on the heritage significance of each structure to the west. As discussed above, the farmhouse has a and to enhance the appearance of the Conservation Area, largely blank northern elevation and most of the causing its significance no harm. northern façade of the northern outbuilding is Looking at the comments from the Conservation Consultee, constructed of concrete blocks. Across much of the area, there appear to be no objections alterations to the buildings views will not be inhibited, with garaging provided for themselves, subject to the treatment of the openings and the the farmhouse within the northern outbuilding. placement of rooflights which the proposals have adhered to. Overall, the proposals are considered to represent a small However, concern was raised with regards to the access track enhancement to the character an appearance of the encroaching into the agricultural landscape. It should be noted Conservation Area and its heritage significance. that the consultee identified harm to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposals.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 24

With regards to the above, it is considered that the access track is incongruous. With regards to this, the tracks would be and parking would not be out of keeping with an agricultural separated by planting, and the area where they would be complex. They would result in the change of character of a small parallel lies north of the modern houses of Cargill Place, rather part of the agricultural surrounds of the building and than the farm complex. Conservation Area, but would not be out of keeping, and would The officer’s report also states that ‘it has not been adequately little inhibit views from modern elements and largely blank demonstrated by the applicant that the proposed access track is elevations. Any very minor harm to the Conservation Area and the only feasible means of providing access to the proposal site buildings within it through changes in setting would be more or that other potentially less harmful alternatives have been than outweighed by the heritage benefits of the scheme which suitably considered’. However, the proposals must be would enhance the appearance of all of the buildings of the considered on their own merits, and in this case it is the complex. conclusion of the above assessment that the proposals would The Officers report also states that the dual arrangement of enhance the heritage significance of the non-designated access track for the proposed scheme and that for Cargill Place buildings and the Conservation Area as a whole.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 25

Conclusions

The significance of each of the buildings of Street Farm and the Conservation Area as a whole has been considered, and an

Conservation Area. As such, the proposals are compliant with all legislation and policy.

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey, Wiltshire 26

Appendix 1: Figure

P18-1959 │ GS │ August 2018 Land at Street Farm, Oaksey *# *# *# *# *# *#

*# *#*# *#

*# *#

*# *# *# *# *# *#*#*#*#*#*# *# *# *#*#*# *# # *# *#*# # *# * *# *# *#*#

*# *#

KEY Site Oaksey Co n servatio n Area Listed Buildings Grade: *# I *# II

TUDOR HOUSE *# *#

HAWKINS MONUMENT IN THE CHURCHYARD, 1 METRE NORTH OF NAVE, CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS LATCHETS *# *#*#*# *# UNIDENTIFIED MONUMENT IN THE CHURCHYARD, HARD AGAINST SOUTH WEST CORNER OF SOUTH AISLE, CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS 7,8,9,10,11, THE STREET CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS *# UNIDENTIFIED MONUMENT IN THE CHURCHYARD, 5 METRES EAST OF CHANCEL, CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS

Revisio n s: First Issue- 09/08/2018 Figure 1: Designated Heritage Assets Lan d at Street Farm , Oaksey

Clien t: - DRWG No :- Sheet No : - REV : - Draw n by: RGO Appro ved by: GS

0 0.15 km > Date: 09/08/2018 (N *# Scale: 1:4,000 @ A3

Co pyright Pegasus Plan n in g Gro up Ltd. Cro w n co pyright. All rights reserved. 2018 Em apsite Licen ce n um ber 0100031673. Ordn an ce Survey Co pyright Licen ce n um ber 100042093. Pro m ap Licen ce n um ber 100020449. Pegasus accepts n o liability fo r an y use o f this do cum en t o ther than fo r its o rigin al purpo se, o r by the o rigin al clien t, o r fo llo w in g Pegasus’ express agreem en t to such use. T 01285 641717 w w w .pegasusgro up.co .uk

*# *#

*# *#*#

*# # *#*#*#*#**#

*# *#

*# *# *# *#*# *#

*# *#

*# www.pegasusgroup.co.uk

Pegasus Group Pegasus House Querns Business Centre Whitworth Road Cirencester Glos GL7 1RT

Telephone: 01285 641717

COPYRIGHT The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of Pegasus Planning Group.