Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
` Preface, Introduction or Planning Policy context Public comments Officers comments NDDC Conservation Team: page 4, the reference to Policy 5 of the Local Plan CHANGE: Omit, on page 4, Item 3 Planning Policy Context, 1st paragraph, requires updating. 2nd line, “… is given in Policy 5 of the adopted NDDC Local Plan”. Add instead, “… is given in Policy 5: The Historic Environment, of the North Dorset Local Plan Part 1, adopted January 2016”.
This is a marvellous document - better than the Domesday Book - and is an The reference to housing and employment underlines the importance of the invaluable record of the village in the 21st Century. It outlines how our village’s work on the Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan. forefathers kept the village more or less in its present shape and similar population for about 1,000 years - 280 people in the Domesday Book and some 700 now. We need to have a care not to wreck the place with overbearing housing developments just so that people can commute to work on the South Coast. Local jobs and housing should increase pari passu (equally) and hand-in-hand (5). An excellent assessment of the need and importance of the appraisal (2). Noted This is a really excellent and very valuable document drafted by the Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan Group. It provides a record of the village as it stands at the beginning of the 21st century (6). Support the need to have a clear understanding of the conservation area surrounding and including Fontmell Magna, and to have it clearly documented for now and the future (7). Fontmell Magna Parish Council: The Conservation Area Appraisal is well written and well presented and therefore commended by the Parish Council (10). Agree with content (22). All fine but wonder if the ancient hedgerows ALL need to be protected. It A hedgerow removal that forms part of a planning application would be a may be that some have to be removed in order to enable building for material consideration along with other material considerations and all example (15). assessed accordingly to determine any planning decision. Dorset Industrial Archaeology Society: under Planning Policy Context, page CHANGE: Section 3 Planning Policy Context, page 4, 1st bullet point, omit, 4, 1st bullet point, “non-listed buildings, such as …. former brewery “former brewery buildings” and “pub”. This is because these are already buildings’”. This implies the main brewery building is not listed (there is a protected by listing. photo on the same page). Does it actually mean the brewery buildings at the back which may not be listed (17)?
Agree that the Conservation Area Appraisal is a necessary step to guide Noted future development (18).
1 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
Am in full agreement that the appraisal is required, especially to ensure that any new building complements the parish buildings already in existence (19). NDDC Conservation Team: an important source of historical information is CHANGE: Section 2 Introduction, page 4, add at the end of this section, the the Fontmell Magna Village Archive Society which should be referred to in new paragraph, “An important resource is the Fontmell Magna Village the draft conservation area appraisal. Archive at www.fontmellmagna.net”. Historic England: The community should be hugely congratulated for the Historic England’s congratulation is noted. Appraisal it has produced. There has obviously been some guidance from your authority to ensure that the eventual product meets its brief and Regarding the request to consider a management plan section to the corporate requirements for such documents, and we note that our own conservation area appraisal, subject to Cabinet approval, such a section guidance on producing Appraisals has also been used to inform the would be considered with the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group, and as outcome. necessary, prepared, consulted on with the results reported to Cabinet for It is obviously a matter of discretion for your authority to assess the decision. Appraisal in detail and adopt it formally. Our only comment would be to reiterate that made in response to the neighbourhood plan and ask if the issues affecting the Conservation Area might be more explicitly identified and responses to them form a management plan section within the document (21).
Location & Setting Public comments Officers comments Very pleased that the importance of landscape character is so well Noted appreciated (2). In addition to the land included in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty The view south from the village is relatively flat and little is discernible other (AONB) and the views from the AONB which could be impacted by than St Bartholomew’s spire at some distance and the outline of Hambledon insensitive building schemes, it is also important to consider the views from Hill 3 miles away. However, the visual and historic relationship between the the village towards Sutton Waldron and the hills beyond (7). two villages should be recognised. CHANGE: Section 7 Character analysis, page 14, under Landmark Views, to the last paragraph add the sentence, “Occasional views of the church spire of Sutton Waldron show the important visual relationship between Fontmell Magna and its near neighbour”. Important for future planning (8). Noted Agree the setting and location criteria (18). In agreement (19). Agree with content (22). It is stated to be important that landscape character is preserved and Because these comments are more applicable to the Fontmell Magna mentions ‘the rural landscape comprising fields to the north and south of the Neighbourhood Plan, they have been forwarded to the Neighbourhood Plan village’. It would be a pity to allow building development on the southerly Working Group.
2 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
approach to the village as this would mean losing farmland and also diminish the already quite short distance and number of fields between Fontmell and Sutton Waldron (11). Agree paragraph three (12). Paragraph three (page 5) states, “It is important that the character of any changes to the built environment is considered in the light of their visibility from the higher ground of the adjacent escarpment of the AONB and the setting of the conservation area”.
Historic Development & Archaeology Public comments Officers comments NDDC Conservation Team: Map 4 (page 8) does not show Springhead, CHANGE: Section 5 Historic development & archaeology, page 8, amend Springhead Farm and all of the strip lynchets that are on the east side of the Map 4 to show all of the strip lynchets and Springhead and Springhead village and in the conservation area. Farm. Fontmell Magna is steeped in history starting with the spring at Springhead As stated on page 4 of the conservation area appraisal, under the Planning which has presumably been flowing since prehistoric times. Anything which (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the Local Planning even hints at damaging this or any other part of the heart of the village Authority “has a duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving should be condemned (5). or enhancing the character or appearance of that area”.
It is clear from archaeological evidence that the area has been continuously settled since at least 2,000 AD. The Domesday book shows Fontmell Magna as having a population of 280, not all that much smaller than the present 770 villagers. It behoves us to maintain the approximate size and character of this unique and beautiful place for posterity (6). This section is broadly accurate. The village has an interesting local history Because these comments are more applicable to the Fontmell Magna having been settled since the Saxon times and it is important that whatever Neighbourhood Plan they have been forwarded to the Neighbourhood Plan still remains dating back to early history should be retained and conserved. Working Group. Post war building of the 1960’s – 1970’s seem to have taken no consideration of historical buildings, views and the impact on the existing village. It is important to retain ancient hedgerows and wildflower areas (7). A very fascinating and illuminating account (2). Noted Of widespread interest (8). A very useful and comprehensive overview is provided in the Conservation Area Appraisal (18). Agree with the information (19). Dorset Industrial Archaeology Society: under Historic Development & CHANGE: under Section 5 Historic Development and archaeology, page 7, Archaeology, page 7, 1st paragraph, 1st sentence, “Right up to the twentieth 1st paragraph, starting at 1st line, omit, “right up to the twentieth century there century there was no industry in Fontmell…” This sentence is incorrect - was no industry in Fontmell other than agriculture and probably button
3 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
mills are industry and three were mention on page 6 and again on page 9, making, There was a brewery from circa 1870-1900, a malting and an and even in this same paragraph, which also talks of a brewery, maltings engineering works at Springhead in the 1890’s/1900’s, to be replaced by a and engineering works (17). milk and cheese factory, but nothing else other than a number of trades”. Instead add, “Right up to the twentieth century, there was agriculture and probably button making and there were mills, a brewery from circa 1870- 1900, a malting and an engineering works at Springhead in the 1890s/1900s, to be replaced by a milk and cheese factory, and a number of trades”.
Spelling of the name Arundell differs on pages 5 & 6 (22). The spelling to be “Arundell” and will be corrected on page 5. Typographical error evident on page 7, last paragraph, second to last line, It should be “until” and will be corrected accordingly. query “to till” (22). Mention should be made of the open fields, which still exist today to the east As commented, Netton Field is in the Fontmell Magna conservation area. of the village, these being Netton Field, Littlecombe and Longcombe. Netton Littlecombe and Longcombe receive protection because they are situated in Field is within the conservation area, thanks to the inclusion of the strip the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) to the east of the village. It lynchets, but there is a case for extending the area to include the other two is not proposed to amend the conservation area boundary. fields (22). There is mention of the open fields in the conservation area appraisal (page 6) but this could be expanded by reference to a detailed source of information on fields, such as those named above, on the Fontmell Magna Village Archive Society’s website.
CHANGE: Section 5 Historic development and archaeology, page 6, 3rd paragraph, 7th line, omit, “community with a 3-field system…” and instead add, “community with a 3-field system (see also the Fontmell Magna Village Archive website)…”
Settlement Pattern Public comments Officers comments The importance of the Conservation Area is evident in maintaining the Noted sensible settlement pattern (2). The views into and out of the village are vital to the present inhabitants and The conservation area appraisal stresses the importance of views and the to those visiting. The importance of the present conservation boundaries appropriateness and significance of the conservation area boundary. need to be reinforced and the settlement (5). It is highly desirable that we continue the settlement pattern of the last The conservation area appraisal identifies such village characteristics and century so that there are no high density areas and any development should will be important in informing planning decisions. be, as far as possible, obscured by trees and hedgerows (6).
4 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
The village currently nestles quite comfortably in the vale. It does not detract The setting is already protected by the conservation area being thrown wide from the views from Sutton Hill, Fontmell Down or from the properties at of the settlement area - see the last paragraph of page 9. Sutton Waldron that look towards Fontmell Magna. The open spaces within and around the village enhance this vista and should be protected through inclusion in the conservation area (7). Any further spread should be contained within proposed limits (8). This is not the remit of a conservation area appraisal. In this section it mentions both the views of the village from Sutton Hill and A conservation area appraisal defines the special architectural and historic the setting to the west and south being protected by fields. The southerly interest of the area only, so these comments are applicable to the Fontmell entry to the village along the A350 is the first aspect of the village to be Magna Neighbourhood Plan and has been forwarded to the Neighbourhood seen by very many people, including tourists. It would be a great pity if this Plan Working Group. first impression were to be dominated by a sizeable building development (11).
Since, "The village has developed over the last century in such a way that a pattern of open spaces, including small fields and large gardens, has prevented the settlement from becoming a high density village, an aspect which is much valued by the community…" Any development must be designed with maintaining the above statement from the document by only having small builds with low density in different areas around the settlement (16). A helpful summary (18). Noted A good accurate summary (19). Possibly reference open fields in third paragraph (page 9) - see previous The open fields are referred to on page 6 of the conservation area appraisal, comment (open fields, which still exist today to the east of the village, these under Section 5 Historic development and archaeology. See also the being Netton Field, Littlecombe and Longcombe. Netton Field is within the comment and officer’s response under this section. conservation area, thanks to the inclusion of the strip lynchets) (22).
Character Analysis Public comments Officers comments NDDC Conservation Team: page 11, the title “Locally Important Features” CHANGE: under Locally Important Features, amend text on page 11 as implies non-designated heritage assets. On the same page, a list of such follows: features includes the strip lynchets and the Old Brewery grain hoist. The 2nd paragraph, omit, “As well as buildings for habitation, the village offers former is protected by scheduling and the latter by listing. Some clarity in other features which add to the interest of the area such as” and instead, the text could explain that whilst the grain hoist and strip lynchets are add, “As well as buildings for habitation, the village offers distinctive features designated heritage assets, they are distinctive features in the conservation which add to the interest of the area, some of which are within protected area. buildings”.
5th bullet point, “Town mill structure, mill race and former water fountain with curved roof” add at the end of this text an asterisk that is related to a
5 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
footnote at the end of all bullet points that says, “* protected by Listed Building status”.
15th bullet point, “Grain hoist at the Old Brewery”, apply an asterisk and the same footnote as for the 5th bullet point, as mentioned above.
14th bullet point, omit, “Strip Lynchets” and instead add, “Strip Lynchets (Scheduled Monument)”. Very comprehensive and enlightening (2). Noted A comprehensive study (8). An excellent overview of what makes Fontmell Magna such a desirable place to live in (19). The locally important features lend the village its unique and charming Planning decisions will have regard to locally important features and the character and should be conserved at all costs. Any development should local building traditions, and the conservation area appraisal, which be carried out with consideration to historic local materials and style, identifies such features and traditions, will be an essential source of avoiding very modern, maybe fashionable, architecture (6). information. Broadly agree with the comments on the built environment. The older The local vernacular is the whole range of domestic or functional buildings properties (pre 1940) give the village its character. However, many of the included in the Appendix B Listed Building references and Appendix C newer properties are also being improved to fit in with the “local vernacular”. Unlisted buildings contributing to the character of the area. The local It would be beneficial to all if there was a clear idea of what the “local vernacular is also referred to in Section 7, under the Built Environment vernacular” actually was which could be advised on by local planners so (page 10), Section 10, under Building Materials and architectural details that when applications for improvements were submitted it could be made (page 21) and Section 12, Summary (page 24). clear what was and was not allowed. This would prevent the building of inappropriate properties or extensions in the village (7). The landscape character of the village must be retained. The open spaces, Noted gardens and trees add to the “country” feel of the village. Street lighting would ruin the “dark skies” enjoyed by all who live in the village (7). Appendix C, an observation on list of “unlisted buildings that contribute to It is unclear which other properties considered to contribute to character are the character of the village”. There are other properties on West St which being referred to. contribute to the character which have not been included (7). Another landmark view is when you follow the footpath from Sutton Waldron The more significant views are considered under Section 6, Settlement towards Fontmell Magna and you see the rear of the houses in West St, the pattern (page 9), under Section 7, Character analysis, sub-sections church and Melbury Beacon beyond (7). Landscape Character (page 12) and Landmark Views (pages 14 & 15). Locally important features also include the bank and tall hedgerows that run Such features are recognised by the conservation area appraisal. On page along West St to retain the character of a country lane (7). 11, under Locally Important Features, 1st paragraph, 1st line it says, “Distinctive features of the roads and tracks in the conservation area are the high banks and hedges…” Absence of street lighting is an important feature of the Area (12). This is recognised in the draft conservation area appraisal (page 13).
6 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
The absence of street lighting contributes hugely to the character of the village and would appear to give wildlife the opportunity to roam in a natural environment (13). It is important too to protect our wildlife corridors by avoiding the removal of Whilst a conservation area appraisal does not involve wildlife legislation, the trees and unnecessary destruction of mature hedgerows (13). importance of trees and hedgerows to the character and appearance of the conservation area is recognised. Agree that pre 1940 buildings contribute significantly to the character of the Noted area. Agree that the area immediately to the east of the A350 forms part of the setting for the AONB and that any development could seriously affect the character of the Conservation Area. Agree that hedges are important wildlife corridors and important visual features of the village - they should be protected. Agree that the absence of street lighting is a good thing (18). What is meant by SSSI on page 12 (20)? The abbreviation SSSI means Site of Special Scientific Interest. CHANGE: Section 7 Character Analysis, page 12, under Landscape Character, 1st paragraph, last line, omit “designated SSSIs…” and instead add, “designated SSSIs (Site of Special Scientific Interest)…” Page 12, under Landscape Character, again a reference to the open fields The open fields are referred to on page 6 of the conservation area appraisal, as commented on above (22). under Section 5 Historic development and archaeology. See also the comment and officer’s response under this section.
Listed Buildings Public comments Officers comments 37 & 38 South St (page 30) are described as being C20 but understand that 37 & 38 South St are shown on the OS 1886 map. they are C19, built at much the same time as other brick and flint semi- detached pairs in the village (1). CHANGE: page 30, Appendix C, Unlisted buildings contributing to the character of the area, under South St, Nos 37, 38, 1st line, omit, “Early This section also details many unlisted buildings which contribute to the C20” and instead add, “Built in 1874 with later extensions”. character of the village. My own cottage, 37 South St, comes into this category and is currently the southerly cottage in the village. It was actually built in 1874, There are other similar pairs of cottages built at a similar time, but only not the early C20 as stated in the document, although it has been sensitively Charlie’s Cottage, Mill St (page 32 of Appendix C) and 54/55 West Street extended in the last 30 years using local materials. This cottage was one of (page 34 of Appendix) in the middle of the village are matching pairs. four similar pairs, one at each geographical point of entry into the village. The others are: Charlies’s Cottage in Mill St, 5 & 6 North St on the A350 and another pair just west of Bedchester crossroads which have recently been extensively refurbished. These cottages add to the character and balance of the village and it would be a pity to do any extensive building beyond the boundaries that they once defined (11).
7 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
NDDC Conservation Team: identify as appropriate additional farm buildings Seek Cabinet approval to consult owners and interested parties in regard that potentially are of local importance. to the possible addition of the farm cottage and stables/garage at Middle Farm, Lurmer St as buildings of local importance and with the results of Consequently, two buildings have been identified as having potential local the consultation reported to Cabinet for decision at a later date. importance:
1. Former farm cottage, Middle Farm, Lurmer St - 1 ½ storey. Stone/red brick to the northern gable but other elevations painted/rendered. Dormers in the attics. Clay pantiled roof. Long single storey, pitched roof extension to the south of the original cottage. Also of historic interest in relation to the host Middle Farm House”. (For identification purposes, see map below).
2. Stables/garage, Middle Farm, Lurmer St – Early C20. Red brick with a clay pantiled roof. Up and over garage door inserted to the northern end. Some simple, metal Crittal windows along the west elevation”. (For identification purposes, see map below).
8 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
The listed buildings of Fontmell Magna are a vital part of the character of the The conservation area appraisal recognises the significance of the listed village. Their visibility should be protected and developments (whether road or buildings and their contribution to the character and appearance of the housing) should not swamp them or radically change the nature of their conservation area. surroundings (5). There are a great many listed buildings in the village which clearly form and The listed buildings contribute greatly to the character and appearance of contribute to the character of the area. Their status will obviously be preserved the conservation area and this is recognised in the conservation area along with features of local interest (6). appraisal. These are all significant buildings and should be conserved. If all properties Properties that contribute to the character of the village, including the that contributed to the character of the village were included in the listed buildings, are already included in the conservation area. conservation area then this would help prevent the listed buildings from being blighted by inappropriate development (7). Well consulted (8). Noted Agree (19). It is important that the listed features are preserved and not affected by any A conservation area appraisal assists in preserving the historic interest of alongside development; we have a duty to preserve our historic past and local the area and its local environment. environment (13). Dorset Industrial Archaeology Society: under Listed Buildings, page 16, on Regarding Springhead, there is no reference in the draft conservation Listed Buildings & features of local Interest map, sites of industrial area appraisal or the statutory listing description to its association with archaeological interest include: the Flower family under the name ‘J W Flower and Company’ (Fontmell 8. Springhead – former corner mill and later premises for brewery and Magna Village Archive). engineering works of Flower Bros (see below). An important site. 9. The Crown – this was part of the brewery, being the ‘brewery tap’. CHANGE: Section 9 Coherent Groups, page 20, 2nd paragraph, 3rd line, 10. The Old Brewery – the main frontage is impressive but how much of the omit, The buildings at Springhead, once an engineering works…” and rear is listed? An important site, the building itself being a remarkable survival instead add, “The buildings at Springhead, once the engineering works J of a small late 19thC brewery dominating the village. It is associated with W Flower & Co…”. Flower Bros. who established an engineering works making brewing and bottling equipment, which became so successful they moved to a new factory Similarly with The Old Brewery and The Crown, there is no reference to in Wimborne in the early 1900s. This building survives as part of a housing the former brewery’s connection with Flower family and The Crown’s development. The brewery is also associated with Sir Newman Flower, relationship to the brewery. The importance of the brewery as expressed publisher and owner of Cassell & Co. by the Dorset Industrial Archaeology should also be included. 11. Millbrook House – the brewery owner/manager’s house apparently. 16. Town Mill and House CHANGE: Section 7 Character Analysis, sub-heading The Built And: Environment, page 10, 3rd paragraph, omit, “Non-domestic buildings B Town Mill Bridge and water fountain include a pub, a former brewery, a large former rectory…” P pump in thatched shelter Instead, add, “Non-domestic buildings include a pub (part of the brewery, S Sheep Wash and the ‘brewery tap’), a former brewery (associated with the Flower M Middle Mill Dam and Sluice (17). family and according to the Dorset Industrial Archaeology Society, a remarkable survival of a small late nineteenth century brewery), a large former rectory…”
9 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
Millbrook House was the brewery house (also confirmed by the web article on Sir (Walter) Newman Flower (1879-1964) by the Fontmell Magna Village Archive. The listing description for Millbrook House does not mention this.
CHANGE: Section 8 Listed Buildings, page 16, under the list titled Listed Buildings, item 11, omit, “Millbrook House” and instead add, “Millbrook House (former brewery house)”.
Otherwise, the other built structures are mentioned sufficiently. Dorset Industrial Archaeology Society: not on map 7, an unlisted building The Old Toll House, South St, is included in Appendix C on page 30. (Knapp Cottage?) on the last corner of the road out to the south may have been a toll house (17). The other features of interest to industrial archaeologists are noted. Dorset Industrial Archaeology Society: other features of interest to industrial archaeologists include letter boxes, guide posts, drain covers, etc. (17). Agree that the Conservation Area has many (non-listed) buildings which Noted significantly contribute to the character of the village (18). Appendix C – the Old Tollhouse has a tile hung extension not weatherboarding CHANGE: Appendix C, page 30, under South St, The Old Toll House, (19). 2nd line, omit, “Weatherboarded extension…” and instead add, “Tile hung extension…” NDDC Conservation Team: in the listing description The Old Brewery is CHANGE: Section 8 Listed Buildings, page 16, under the list titled Listed identified as Fontmell Potteries. Buildings, item 10, omit, “The Old Brewery” and instead add, “The Old Brewery (Fontmell Potteries)
Coherent Groups Public comments Officers comments Feel it is important not to urbanise the village. There is a need to retain what The draft conservation area appraisal recognises the importance of village remains of the village streetscape. Housing estates do not fit with the rural streetscape and identifies rural character and its importance in preserving or character of a conservation village (7). enhances the conservation area. Comprehensive study (8). Noted Very accurate (19). Where we can, it enhances the character of the village to preserve Noted agricultural buildings (13). Agree that the most recent development (St Andrew's View) fails to reflect Noted the essence of the rural vernacular or the character of the Conservation Area (18)
10 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
Building Materials & Architectural Details Public comments Officers comments NDDC Conservation Team: on page 23, the reference to thatched roofs CHANGE: Section 10 Building materials and architectural details, page 23, requires more positivity. 3rd paragraph, 2nd line, omit, “While a thatched roof may be attractive, it commands a high price and requires a fairly bottomless purse to maintain”, and instead add, “The local tradition of thatching should be maintained and encouraged as appropriate”. The variety of material and styles within the boundaries of common sense Noted are part of the appeal of the area (2). It should be stipulated that all new buildings in Fontmell should be in The draft conservation area appraisal is thorough in identifying traditional character with the surroundings i.e. traditional Dorset materials and designs materials, design and details in the village but it cannot determine policy on should be used. In nearly all cantons of Switzerland it has been the policy building design. This is the remit of the Local Plan, or as applicable, the for decades that in rural areas new dwellings have to be modelled on the Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan that is currently being produced. Swiss chalet and architectural fantasies involving concrete and glass are forbidden. There is no reason why such a policy should not be introduced here. Unless housing design is strictly controlled, the nature and attraction of Fontmell will be ruined (5). It appears that there have been no guidelines for what is permitted in the The Fontmell Magna Draft Pre-submission Neighbourhood Plan has Policy village. Planners seem to prefer colour washing to brick and flint. It would be FM9 Building design that covers materials and detailing. A public useful to establish a “local vernacular” for the Fontmell Magna conservation consultation on this policy and the whole draft plan, took place October- area so that those carrying out home improvements could take that into November 2017. Further information is available at account (7). http://www.fontmellmagnapc.co.uk/FontmellMagna-PC/neighbourhood_plan- Move into the times, in sympathy with the area (8). 9778.aspx Need to accept that “modern” building materials will, over time, supplant For the foreseeable future at least, the availability of traditional materials will more of the traditional materials (12). assist in preserving the character and appearance of the conservation area. Agree that some 47 non-listed buildings are considered as contributing to Noted the character of the village (18). Useful reference for future developers on what enhances or complements Noted existing buildings. Good summary (19). It would be helpful to include illustrations (photos or drawings) of some of These are standard architectural terms but it is recognised that they are not these architectural features, for example, hoodmoulds, purlins, cupola, necessarily in general use. Flemish bond headers (20). CHANGE: the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group to consider providing a Glossary at the end of the conservation area appraisal.
Last paragraph on page 21, had not noticed before the dogtooth detail to Noted chimney pots. Fascinating (22)!
11 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
Design Features Public comments Officers comments As for my comments under Building Materials & Architectural Details (2). Noted See my comments under Building Materials & Architectural Details. There The conservation area appraisal identifies the building traditions in Fontmell are some buildings in Fontmell, built in the 60s and 70s that stick out like Magna and this will inform planning decisions. sore thumbs. One hopes that such things would not now be allowed. Apart from anything else, these houses are increasingly difficult to sell (5). Agree that many features of post war house building detract from the This is referred to under Coherent groups (Section 9), on page 19, in the last modern character. However, by following the natural village settlement paragraph, “The most recent development St Andrew’s View… agrarian structure, there should be room for modern buildings using modern building lifestyle” and under Section 11, Design features on page 23. materials so long as they enhance and do not detract. Creating a pastiche of ancient buildings as in St Andrews View is not the answer (7). Maintain village character (8). Noted As above, (Ref Building Materials & Architectural Details: Need to accept Noted that “modern” building materials will, over time, supplant more of the traditional materials) taste will change with time (12)! Have to acknowledge the increase in car ownership in recent years. Should As this is more applicable to the Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan, this encourage the development of private parking spaces/garages/off-road comment has been forwarded to the Neighbourhood Plan Working Group. spaces/a public parking area (14). Agree that modern design features, which are characteristic of some village Noted development, detract from the character of the village (18). These should be used where possible in the future, unlike some new The draft conservation area appraisal considers the local vernacular, building i.e. Home Farm off South Street, which is out of scale with the including the scale of buildings. whole of the village (19).
Summary Public comments Officers comments Agree with every word of this summary which emphasises the special A conservation area appraisal is an important planning tool, supporting nature of the village. If we wreck it, our children and grandchildren will Policy 5: The Historic Environment in the North Dorset Local Plan, Part 1, curse us (5). adopted January 2016.
Agree with the summary and with the observations made in the 1976 Report Appendix A is the 1976 conservation area designation report. The (Appendix A). However, paragraph 3 (ii), “The materials to be used shall be significance of this report is recognised in the draft conservation area appropriate to the area and sympathetic to the adjoining buildings” should appraisal, and although a useful reference, it is superseded either by a be reviewed. In my view this clause has perpetuated the building of painted conservation area appraisal, subject to Cabinet decision, or by the Draft brick or coloured wash homes in the village, where the owners would have Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan that residents are consulted on. preferred brick and flint or a “country vernacular” (7)
12 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
The whole study is very comprehensive and little alteration seems Noted necessary (8). All the points listed in this section lead me to believe that the character and A conservation area appraisal defines the special architectural and historic beauty of the village of Font ell Magna would be better served by small interest of the area only. These comments are applicable to the Fontmell clusters of new buildings rather than any large scale development and it Magna Neighbourhood Plan and have been forwarded to the seems impossible to imagine how the latter could do anything but detract Neighbourhood Plan Working Group. from this village set in the AONB (11). Agree with final paragraph (12). The final paragraph states, “The many attributes listed in this summary demonstrate the special qualities of the Conservation Area and the need to continue protecting it from any development which would cause harm…” Fully support these comments and the need to protect the conservation The production of a conservation area appraisal is an important planning aid area for the future. It is vital we take on this responsibility (13). in this. The summary very clearly sets out the contents of the document and Noted explains that the wide boundary of the Conservation Area is a vital tool for protecting the settlement (6). Agree with the Summary including the extent of the Conservation Area and the special qualities of the Conservation Area which should be protected from harmful development (18). Excellent (19). No comment other than extension to the Conservation Area to the east to Neston Field is in the conservation area and Little combe and Long combe incorporate the open fields (22). are protection by an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) designation. It is not proposed to amend the conservation area boundary.
Protecting the Conservation Area for the Future Public comments Officers comments NDDC Specialist Service Manager: the text in Section 13, Protecting the CHANGE: page 25, under 13. Protecting the Conservation Area for the Conservation Area for the Future (page 25), requires updating to reflect Future, 1st paragraph, 2nd line, omit, “Protecting the Conservation Area for changes in planning policy and public views. future generations is the responsibility of not only the local community but also the Local planning Authority and it is hoped that all will engage with this aim”. Instead add, "Protecting the Conservation Area for future generations is the responsibility of all who wish to make changes to the fabric including not only the local community but also the Local Planning Authority, developers, agents and architects and it is hoped that all will engage with this aim”.
CHANGE: page 25, under 13. Protecting the Conservation Area for the Future, omit 3rd paragraph, “Since the designation of the Conservation Area
13 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
in 1977, the Local Planning Authority has not always been successful in maintaining the design criteria set out in its 1976 report item 3.3 which is attached as an Appendix. It is essential that alterations and new buildings are carried out in a way which does not cause harm to the Conservation Area so as to reduce the setting of the listed and non-listed buildings which contribute positively to the character of the built environment”. Instead, add, “Since the designation of the Conservation Area in 1977, there have been a number of changes, both in planning policy and public opinion, on how the importance of conservation should be considered in relation to development. These changes have sometimes been at odds with the design criteria set out in the 1976 Conservation Area report (item 3.3) - see Appendix A of this Appraisal. It is essential that future planning policy and development management gives greater weight to the importance of the Conservation Area, so as not to harm the setting of the listed and no-listed buildings which, which contribute positively to the character of the built environment”.
Protect the conservation area at all costs. It is very easy to damage it but Planning applications will be informed by the conservation area appraisal, impossible to undo that damage once done (5). which defines the character and appearance of the conservation area and its setting. As stated, there should be a coordinated approach between the local The conservation area appraisal supports such an approach, as does the community and the Local Planning Authority to act as custodians to Neighbourhood Plan that is being produced by the village. preserve the area for generations to come (6). Just make it clear what the design criteria is, in the conservation area so The Fontmell Magna Draft Pre-submission Neighbourhood Plan has Policy that builders, home improvers etc. can comply with it (7). FM9 Building design. Further information is available at http://www.fontmellmagnapc.co.uk/FontmellMagna-PC/neighbourhood_plan- 9778.aspx Of prime importance (8). Noted Agree (18). Totally agree with the importance of preserving the beauty of the Noted conservation area (11). It is our responsibility to protect the Area for the future and to ensure that A conservation area appraisal will assist in this. development, as and when it takes place, enables the village to retain its character (12). Agree that it is essential to continue to be vigilant in protecting the Conservation Area and any new build or change to existing must complement the existing (19). It is essential that another housing estate anywhere in the village is not A conservation area appraisal defines the special architectural and historic acceptable It would change the whole 'villageness' of Fontmell Magna and, interest of the area only. This comment is applicable to the Fontmell Magna
14 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
wherever it would be placed, would be visible from the surrounding Downs. Neighbourhood Plan and has been forwarded to the Neighbourhood Plan The area along the A350 to the right as you leave the village towards Working Group. Blandford would be a sad blot on the landscape, if filled with housing, as you enter the village from the South. Go and look - you'll see what I mean. Don't let it happen (15). How can we be sure that the design criteria set out in 1977 and in this A conservation area appraisal will assist but design criteria are very much appraisal will be maintained in any future development (20)? the remit of the Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan that is near the pre- submission stage to the district council. Heavy traffic along Mill St is destroying the verges, photographic evidence These comments have been forwarded to the Neighbourhood Plan Working being collated (13). Group. There is also relevance to the draft conservation area appraisal. Traffic is taking precedence over pedestrians. In the short five years that we have lived in Mill St, until recently an attractive rural road, the verges have CHANGE: Section 13 Protecting the Conservation Area for the future, been destroyed, the road is pot-holed and filthy and it is no longer safe for page 25, 2nd paragraph, add the sentence, “Similarly traffic management pedestrian, with no change in sight. These developments detract has a part to play in ensuring grass verges and roadside structures are considerably from the local character. Who has leisure to admire the beauty not damaged by passing vehicles and wide loads”. of the village when dodging cars and lorries and wondering if you will need wellies just to walk along a tarmac road (14)?
Community Involvement Public comments Officers comments Impressed at the way many opportunities have been made for the The village is producing a Neighbourhood Plan and part of the evidence community to be involved and to be able to give their input into the plan (2). base for the plan is a conservation area appraisal. However, under separate planning legislation, a conservation area appraisal has to be consulted on separately and the results reported to the North Dorset District Council Cabinet who will also consider adoption of the conservation area appraisal in support of Policy 5: The Historic Environment of the adopted Local Plan, Part 1. While it is obviously important to involve the village community in village A conservation area appraisal defines the special architectural and historic development, I think the most important criteria of all should be the interest of the area only. These comments are applicable to the Fontmell development of the village AS A WHOLE. Unfortunately community Magna Neighbourhood Plan and have been forwarded to the involvement can mean that some of the views expressed are from self Neighbourhood Plan Working Group. interest and overlook the greater picture (11). It is to be commended the effort that has gone into compiling this document The appraisal was prepared by the Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan and the community has been given every opportunity to contribute (13). Working Group. Content with provisions therein (18). Noted Decisions for development must be made following public consultation, as The Draft Fontmell Magna Neighbourhood Plan is based on extensive well as the Local Planning Authority (20). consultation with parish residents. The pre-submission consultation took place during October - November 2017. The draft Plan includes Section 9,
15 Draft Fontmell Magna Conservation Area Appraisal: public consultation 1 December 2017 – 12 January 2018: public comments received APPENDIX B (A number in brackets is a questionnaire identification only)
Amount and location of new development. The pre-submission consultation is a final check before the draft Plan is submitted to the Local Council after which, it is then put forward for approval by parish residents in a referendum. The residents have been given every opportunity to voice their views or Noted discuss any changes to this Appraisal. A huge amount of work has resulted in an excellent document (19).
AOB Public comments Officers comments Footpaths to Sutton Waldron – there is a long-term aspiration for there to be Because these comments are applicable to the Fontmell Magna a “trailway/all weather” path between Sutton Waldron and Fontmell Magna. Neighbourhood Plan, they have been forwarded to the Neighbourhood Plan This was contained in Sutton Waldron Parish Plan (2010) of which I was Working Group. chairman of the steering group and it was listed on the Dorset Council project/cape(?) and list. There was also a group chaired by the rector of the benefice to look into a trailway for the Iwerne Valley. The first and easiest link would be between Sutton Waldron and Fontmell Magna. It is requested that in any development across the existing footpath between Sutton Waldron and St Andrew’s school corner, which would have been incorporated in a trailway, the path is protected and developed as a start of an all weather path of sufficient width to allow buggies and bicycles to pass by each other. The benefit to Fontmell Magna would be increased use by both adults and children who reside in Sutton Waldron to access the school and other facilities in Fontmell Magna by foot rather than car (3).
16