PLANNING APPLICATION NUMBER:P09/1219

Type of approval sought Listed Building Consent Ward SOUTH Applicant Mr C, Tudor Location: MANOR FARM, MANOR WAY, HALESOWEN, B62 8RJ

Proposal LISTED BUILDING CONSENT TO CONVERT BARNS TO 6 NO. DWELLINGS WITH VISITOR CENTRE FOR HALESOWEN ABBEY. Recommendation APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS Summary:

SITE AND SURROUNDINGS

1 St Mary’s Abbey was founded in 1215 as a monastic house of Premonstratensian Canons. It remained in use as a monastery until the 16th century when, in common with other English monasteries, it was closed down by Henry VIII. As a result many of the medieval buildings fell into decay or were dismantled or destroyed. The site was granted to Sir John Dudley, and his servant George Tuckey occupied a “mansion house” at the Abbey, probably in the location occupied by the current Victorian Farmhouse. The site was sold to the Lyttleton family in 1558 and it later descended to Lord Cobham. The site has been in the ownership of the current applicant since 1993.

2 The current farmhouse and ancillary farm buildings date mainly from the nineteenth century but have some earlier components and these together comprise Manor Abbey Farm, whose buildings largely sit over the area of the medieval cloisters. The farm buildings principally face inwards towards the farmhouse and comprise two groups of structures disposed around separate yards. Beyond the core of Abbey buildings in the surrounding pasture land the earthwork remains of various features including several flights of medieval fishponds are clearly visible.

55 3 The historic, architectural and archaeological significance of the site is recognised in the degree of statutory protection that has been afforded to it. St Mary’s Abbey, Halesowen, was first included in the Schedule of Ancient Monuments in 1914 and it was added to the statutory list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest at grade I in 1950. The listing was principally in relation to surviving medieval masonry but by association the rest of the farm buildings on the site including the farmhouse are also considered to be listed at grade 1. The original scheduling covered all of the buildings on the site (except the farmhouse since dwelling houses cannot be scheduled) and also the land beneath them. In 1975 the scheduling was amended to also incorporate the abbey fishponds and precinct earthworks.

4 In 1995, English Heritage revised the scheduling of Halesowen Abbey once more. Again, the farmhouse itself could not be scheduled but as a part of that revision the rest of the farm buildings were also now specifically excluded from the scheduling (except in specific areas where elements of the scheduled south wall of the medieval Abbey Church had actually been “built in” to the adjacent farm buildings). The farm buildings, therefore, reverted in 1995 to the status of grade I listed buildings. Consequently, listed building control through the local authority now pertains and hence this application for listed building consent.

5 Additionally, most surviving elements of standing medieval masonry on the site, including a complete building known as “the Infirmary”, are in the legal guardianship of English Heritage (EH). The guardianship agreement with the site owner requires EH to be responsible for and to maintain the medieval fabric and gives EH the right to allow limited public access to the guardianship elements of the site.

6 In 2002 planning and listed building applications were submitted for a scheme to convert the farm buildings to a mix of residential and office uses (Reference PO2/0136&PO2/0137). However, these were withdrawn in 2004 following concerns expressed by English Heritage. They felt unable to grant scheduled monument consent for the ground works necessary to accommodate services to the converted buildings. Since 2004 the owner has explored and discounted a series of options in an attempt to identify a sustainable beneficial future use for the farm buildings that could

56 be implemented without unacceptably negative impacts upon the listed buildings or scheduled monument.

7 Regarding the ancient monument, since it was clear that there would be a need for services to be provided in relation to any future scheme, the owner, advised by English Heritage, commissioned Birmingham Archaeology. They excavated a number of test pits and trenches on the proposed lines of service trenches that would be necessary to provide the farm buildings with power, water and drainage. This was in order to physically demonstrate at what depth the survival of significant archaeological remains could be expected. Resulting from this it could be demonstrated that the services could be provided without unacceptable damage to the sites archaeological significance. Scheduled Monument Consent (SMC) was accordingly granted for the implementation of these ground works in November 2008.

8 For the avoidance of any doubt it should, however, be noted that notwithstanding the existing SMC in relation to the provision of services a separate application by the site owner to the Secretary of State for Scheduled Monument Consent will also be required, to the implementation of any works in association with the proposed barn conversions that would cause further ground disturbance or affect in any way scheduled elements of medieval masonry.

PROPOSAL

9 The application proposes the conversion of the farm buildings into six units of accommodation with the provision of a viewing area for visitors to the Abbey in the former threshing floor of the main barn. This would take advantage of the barns opposed cart arches by glazing them, thus allowing visitors a direct view across the former farmyard to the impressive remains of the Abbey Refectory or dining hall.

10 The design philosophy of the scheme has been one of achieving the minimum of necessary intervention with no significant loss of internal walls or historic subdivisions

57 and with the historic roof structures left exposed to view as part of the conversion. In terms of the proposed external changes to the buildings, most windows are shown in existing openings (some of which are proposed to be re-opened and a small number enlarged) with a small number only of new window openings where this is unavoidable. Entrances to the dwellings are proposed off the yard areas at the level of existing thresholds. Whilst the conversion proposals bring with them a requirement for the provision of extraction flues for heating and ventilation these have been sensitively designed so as to mirror existing historic clay roof tile ventilators, used when some of the buildings were cattle byres. They will, therefore, not “read” as being modern additions. A small number of roof lights are shown to be inserted but only where there is no other possible source of natural light and then (with one exception) only in roof slopes internal to the site, thereby not being visible from publicly accessible areas.

11 Amenity space and car parking for the six dwellings is proposed in the form of courtyard spaces within the former farmyard areas. It will, therefore, equally not impinge upon other areas of the Abbey, so as to avoid any potential “suburbanising” effects. In addition new hard landscaping in this area will significantly upgrade what is currently a very poor and deteriorating set of concrete yard surfaces. Visitor parking is proposed on the site of a former Dutch Barn to the north of the site of the Abbey Church, screened by native species hedge planting. The farm track currently used for access will be resurfaced with passing places provided and it will be gated to control visitor access, although an un-gated cattle grid will be installed at the Manor Way entrance to avoid the possibility of traffic “backing up” at peak visitor times.

12 The site owner has undertaken to dedicate as a public right of way the farm track leading from Manor Way and also a linking path running west to east alongside the proposed visitor car park parallel to the Abbey Church to link to the existing public footpath network that currently runs past the Abbey at a considerable distance to the east. It has also been agreed with the site owner that interpretation panels will be provided at salient points within the site and also that the outline of the Abbey Church will be picked out with boards and gravel to further aid visitor orientation and understanding.

58

HISTORY

13 The following planning history is relevant –

APPLICATION PROPOSAL DECISION DATE No. 81/50741 (Outline) warehouse Refused 22/06/81 development 85/50152 Hotel development Refused 25/10/84 85/51860 Hotel and re-instatement Refused 02/01/86 of fish ponds P02/0136 Restoration of redundant Withdrawn 15/01/04 agricultural building to form offices and 3 no. residential units P02/0137 Listed Building Consent Withdrawn 15/01/04 for the above P02/1466 Listed Building Consent – Approved 20/12/05 erection of porch and link

to outbuilding P03/1572 Installation of gabions Refused 20/12/05 (retrospective) P06/0964 Certificate of lawfulness Granted 27/11/07 (gabions) P07/1341 Prior approval under Part Refused 02/08/07 6 Class A of the Town and Country Planning (GPO) Order 1995 for the siting, design and external appearance of an agricultural building. P07/2015 Resubmission of the Approved 15/11/07 above P09/1218 Planning Permission for Undetermined the current proposal – a report on (P09/1219) this application is to be found elsewhere on this agenda

59 PUBLIC CONSULTATION

14 Two representations have been received, one from the Halesowen Abbey Trust (HAT). The issues raised, in summary, are -

• The dominant consideration when determining the conversion proposals should be the requirement to avoid damage to the scheduled monument and to preserve significant archaeological remains;

(Officer comment- agreed)

• If approved then all digging in relation to the implementation of the proposals should be by hand;

(Officer comment- agreed and can be secured by condition on the planning consent)

• HAT identify wide ranging potential for ground disturbance during implementation of the proposals that suggest to them that a period of up to 18 months should be set aside to allow full archaeological excavation to take place that (inter alia) could also aid future interpretation;

(Officer comment- this is not agreed with firstly because it is considered that to require the landowner to fund such large scale work would be unreasonable. Secondly, it would go against the prevailing archaeological ethos of “minimum intervention” and “preservation in situ” that acknowledges that archaeological remains are destroyed by archaeological excavation equally as much as by works of development. Archaeological conditions on any consent granted have accordingly been designed so as to avoid disturbance to archaeological remains wherever possible, thereby minimising any consequent need for recording)

60 • HAT is concerned that residential conversion of the barns could be followed by a proliferation of domestic paraphernalia that could have a suburbanising effect and damage the setting of the Monument;

(Officer comment- all of the amenity space relation to the proposed dwellings is internalised within the yard areas. These are enclosed by the farm buildings themselves such that there should be little or no visual impact upon the wider monument. Additionally it is proposed as a condition of planning consent to remove permitted development rights for the site).

• HAT consider the new car park (for visitors to the Abbey) will have an effect on the sites openness although they note the provision of hedged screening. The car park surface should be “Grasscrete” or similar;

(Officer comment- agreed there is a limited impact that is reduced by screening and also note it is proposed to use “Grasscrete” as suggested. It is considered that the benefits of the scheme outweigh the minor adverse impact)

• HAT do not consider the barns to be significant buildings in historic terms such that their being put into good condition through conversion could be justified as a benefit if this damaged the Ancient Monument;

(Officer comment- do not disagree but consider that the conversion proposals do not damage the monument but will deliver repaired buildings in a beneficial use and positively improve the site for visitors).

• HAT point out the archaeological sensitivity of the area off Manor Way (former Abbey entrance arrangements?) where it is proposed to locate a cattle grid and urge that this should be fully taken into account.

61

(Officer comment- agreed and can be secured by condition on the planning consent)

15 The proposal was reported to a meeting of the Halesowen Area Committee on 14th January 2010. In discussion on the report, the following points made by the Committee chimed with those from Halesowen Abbey Trust, namely:- - it was important that items of archaeological interest undiscovered hitherto were not lost through construction works; - that any trench digging or other excavation necessary should be carried out sensitively and by hand;

OTHER CONSULTATION

16 English Heritage – the archaeological evaluation has revealed that there has been considerable ground disturbance in the yards adjacent to the barns – this disturbance provides an opportunity to accommodate new services and drainage without extensive further disruption of buried deposits of national importance – nevertheless there should be a condition that the groundworks are archaeologically supervised and appropriate recording of features of interest occurs.

17 In terms of the barn conversions themselves EH advise that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of the Council’s specialist conservation advice.

18 Ancient Monuments Society – prepared in this case to defer to English Heritage given their close involvement with the case.

19 Bromsgrove District Council – no objections.

62 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY

20 Unitary Development Plan (adopted 2005) S2 (Creating a more Sustainable Borough); DD1 (Urban Design); HE1 (Local Character and Distinctiveness) HE2 (Landscape Heritage Areas) HE6 (Listed Buildings) HE8 (Archaeology and Information) HE9 (Scheduled Ancient Monuments) HE11 (Archaeology and Preservation) SO1 (Green Belt)

21 Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) Historic Environment

22 Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) and Statements (PPS) PPG 2 - Green Belts PPS 5 – Planning for the Historic Environment

ASSESSMENT

23 The Key Issue in relation to this application is the need to consider the impact of the proposals upon the character and appearance of the listed buildings directly affected and also any impact the works may have upon the site and setting of the scheduled ancient monument of St Mary’s Abbey. In terms of setting the Green Belt and Landscape Heritage Area status of the wider area is also relevant and this issue is dealt with in the sister planning application P09/1219.

24 As noted above in the “Proposals” section of this report the design philosophy of the scheme has been one of achieving the minimum only of necessary intervention in relation to the historic fabric of the listed farm buildings. Internal arrangements in terms of dividing walls and plan form will remain largely “as is” and viewed externally only relatively minor alterations will be apparent from within the courtyard amenity

63 areas. Viewed from the Ancient Monument looking towards the Farmhouse virtually no changes will be apparent other than that the Cart Arch of the main barn will be glazed in to accommodate a viewing area for visitors and two other existing doors and one window opening will be provided with suitably designed doors/windows. One “conservation” roof light will be visible on the roof slope of the main barn but this replaces an adjacent already existing but not usefully positioned agricultural roof light that becomes tiled over. Whilst details have been provided as part of the application it is considered that a high quality of detailing of new components (doors, windows etc.) and of related finishes can best be secured by the attachment of suitable conditions to this consent.

25 In terms of physical impact upon the Ancient Monument any such impacts above or below ground will require a further application for Scheduled Monument Consent to be submitted to the Secretary of State. Notwithstanding this fact as part of this listed building application the applicant has demonstrated that the barns are structurally sound such that underpinning should not be required. It is acknowledged that the converted barns will require new floors with insulation to be installed. However, information from archaeological evaluation as to the depth of sensitive archaeology below existing floor level and discussion with the Council’s Building Control Team indicates that this is capable of being implemented satisfactorily without impacting upon archaeological deposits. To ensure that this is the case a condition requiring the detailed design of the new floors to be submitted to the Council for approval is proposed. This will be in addition to the requirement in any case for scheduled monument consent (SMC) to be gained prior to implementation of any works.

26 Again in terms of ensuring that all necessary ground works are monitored archaeologically and any excavation that could affect archaeological remains is undertaken by hand digging only a suitable condition is proposed for attachment to the sister planning application (PO9/1218). Again, all such works will also require SMC.

27 Overall, it is therefore considered that the proposed restoration works are capable of sensitively bringing the farm buildings back into beneficial use and that the proposed

64 works will not unduly adversely impact on the intrinsic historic value of the Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM). Enabling works such as public footpath provision and on site interpretation are also proposed so as to potentially enhance its safeguarding and wider social and cultural benefit (in line with the objectives of PPS 5). This is subject to recommended conditions on both this application and the sister planning application (PO9/1218) to ensure all of the relevant works to the site are actioned appropriately and scope for (further) archaeological investigation and recording is secured.

CONCLUSION

28 Overall, it is therefore considered that the proposed restoration works are acceptable and capable of sensitively bringing the farm buildings back into beneficial use and that the proposed works will not unduly adversely impact on the intrinsic historic value of the SAM. As such it is considered that the proposals are in conformity with national and local guidance and the adopted 2005 Unitary Development Plan and in particular

policies HE1 Local Character and Distinctiveness, HE6 Listed Buildings, HE8 Archaeology and Information HE9 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and HE11 Archaeology and Preservation

RECOMMENDATION

29 It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

Conditions and/or reasons:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this consent. 2. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with the details shown on drawing nos. M0/MFB/727/2r2 /3r1 /4r1 /5 /6 /7 /8r2, M0/CT/934/2r4, D/B32/1R1 /2/R1, MD/MFB/12R1and site plan figure 1

3. Only alterations and demolition detailed and specified in this application will be permitted. All other existing fabric to the interior and exterior of the Listed Building shall be afforded adequate protection against damage or unauthorised removal at all times throughout the construction process.

65 4. No development shall take place until a detailed written schedule of works including structural and other specifications and method statements for the refurbishment and conversion of the listed farm buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority such details to include all materials to be used for the walls, roof, roof lights, windows, doors and rainwater goods.

The works shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved details.

5. Notwithstanding the submitted plans and drawings, full details of the following matters including sample panels where applicable and appropriate shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to development commencing and the works shall thereafter be carried out in strict accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing:

a. Details of the measures to be initiated before work commences and whilst work proceeds to safeguard at all times the structural integrity and stability of the building; to secure it against the elements and to protect against unauthorised/unlawful intrusion for whatever reason including malicious damage;

b. Brickwork: The type of brick to be used for areas of repair and new build, their size, colour and texture, the source and mix of the lime mortar which shall be used to bed and point the bricks, the brick bond, gauge and joint tooling, the method of repointing masonry including the use of sample panels.

c. Fenestration/window frames and glazing. Detailed specifications/samples of the fenestration proposed in respect of the listed buildings shall be submitted for approval including details of glazing type and decorative finishes such window details to be provided at a large scale, typically indicating profiles and sections at head, cill, jambs and glazing bars, etc., and shall also illustrate the relationship between window frames and structural openings.

d. Doors/doorways. Detailed specifications/samples of new doors proposed in respect of the listed buildings shall be submitted for approval including details of glazing type and decorative finishes such details to be provided at a large scale and shall illustrate the relationship between door frames and structural openings.

e. A schedule and specification of all proposed builders work to historic fabric in connection with all service installations and full details in respect of louvres, flues, extracts and vents in connection with heating, ventilation, plant, soil and mechanical installation detailing those measures to be taken to safeguard the fabric of the listed building and its appearance both during insertion and in the case of potential future removal.

f. Full details of the methods of installation, materials to be used and depth of construction proposed in relation to the installation of all new floor structures proposed at ground floor level within the listed farm buildings including details of the steps to be taken to avoid damage to

66 archaeological remains and details as to the treatment proposed at the interface between new floor structures and such archaeological remains as may be exposed as a result of the works.

67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79