Agenda item

Retention of glazed doors to 2 original cart door openings.

 

Public Participation

 

·       Mark Pettitt, Agent spoke in support of the application.

·       Mrs. Middleton, Applicant spoke in support of the application

·       Confirm that we had one from Pewsey PC that was after the deadline but was circulated to the Committee and case officer.

 

Pippa Card, Senior Conservation/Planning Officer presented a report which recommended that listed building consent and planning permission be granted subject to conditions for the retention of glazed doors to 2 original cart door openings.

 

Slides were shown to the meeting, showing the barn’s location, plans of the barn and photographs showing the glazed doors.

 

It was explained that the glazed doors had been installed without the benefit of listed building consent or planning permission in 2017 and the Council was made aware of the unauthorised works via an enforcement complaint received on 17th February 2020. The applicants were now seeking to rectify the situation by submitting the two applications to gain permission for the works to the grade II listed barn.

 

The main consideration was the impact that the doors had on the special interest of the listed building i.e. were the changes harmful to the significance of the designated heritage asset. The special interest of the grade II listed barn lay in its simple vernacular construction of timber framing with a combed wheat reed thatched roof.

 

Originally the building would have had two sets of paired timber threshing doors fixed to these openings, so that they could be closed to protect the crop stored within from the elements. These doors had been lost over time and although the list description notes that there were cart doors in the second bays, there was no evidence that they were in situ at the time of listing (30th October 1987) or that they had been removed since listing. It was known by officers from visits carried out since 2010 that the barn did not have doors then.

 

In 1991 a change of use was approved from storage to one for activities relating to the production of cider. The current owners had realised a need to provide a secure building for the storage and protection of the product and associated equipment within the building.

 

Adaptive reuse of any redundant farm building could safeguard the building from deterioration by providing it with a long-term use, particularly so when in secure ownership and having an active use protects the building for the foreseeable future.

 

In terms of the building’s character, it would originally have had solid timber doors. The glazed doors had enclosed the barn to the elements rather than blocking them up: the doors were in sections and could be fully opened due to them being fitted into runners enabling them to be fully opened for access, as required. The glazed doors also preserved the view through the building that was possible prior to the changes. This approach was considered to be in line with Historic England guidance.

 

The NPPF requires that the proposals be assessed on the level of harm caused to the significance of the designated heritage asset (paragraph 193). Substantial harm was usually reserved for the total loss or destruction of a designated heritage asset or development within its setting and therefore was not relevant here, as the building was being retained and there was no development within its setting. Although the addition of the glazed doors was an alteration to the building, the impact on the building was that relating to the visual and aesthetic qualities of the vernacular building, as no intervention or loss of historic fabric had been required in order to implement the changes.

 

The concerns of the community in relation to the ecological impact of the changes to the building were noted. The Ecological Assessment (EA) provided with the application confirmed that there was evidence of birds entering the building through small gaps within the elevations and that fresh bat droppings had also been witnessed, providing evidence that the building was still being used by some species. Both the Council’s Ecologist and the EA statement had suggested that additional bat and bird nesting boxes could be provided within the property boundary to mitigate any harm done to alleviate any concerns raised on this matter. Informatives had been suggested by the Council’s Ecology Team to be included on a positive decision.

 

With regard to the comments relating to the lack of an application for the change of use, this had not been applied for, as the use of the building for production of organic cider and apple juice was approved in 1991. The Agent and Applicants had confirmed that the use continues to be for the apple harvest and associated agricultural equipment. Comments had been received regarding the current use not being in accordance with the planning permission approved in 1991, however no evidence to support these claims had been provided. A website link contained with one of the representations was investigated but the link did not work and returned an error message.

 

The scheme was considered to accord with the aims of Wiltshire Core Strategy, in particular Core Policy 57 ‘Ensuring High Quality Design & Place Shaping’ and Core Policy 58 ‘Ensuring the Conservation of the Historic Environment’.

 

It was determined that the retention of the glazed doors would not harm the significance of the designated heritage asset, its setting or the special qualities of the North Wessex Downs AONB. The scheme did not have a harmful impact on the listed barn’s historic fabric and overall character as a traditional farm building.

 

The strong strength of feeling against the proposal by the local community was recognised, however it was considered that there were no valid grounds to refuse listed building consent or planning permission for the proposal.

 

In response to technical questions it was stated that it was hard to assess whether wildlife had been disturbed by the installation of the doors, as they were installed in 2017, so the ecology team had stated that any harm had already occurred. However, it was noted in the Ecological Assessment provided with the application that small birds and bats were still accessing the building.

 

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views, as detailed above.

 

It was noted that an application to speak had been received after the deadline from Pewsey Parish Council. Therefore, Pewsey Parish Council, who were in objection to the application, circulated their statement to all Committee members and the planning officer.

 

The unitary division member, Cllr Jerry Kunkler, spoke in support of the

application. Cllr Kunkler stated that he had called the application is as was requested to do so. However, he did not agree with the views of the objectors. He felt the applicants had spent thousands on the house and estate and that the barn was vastly improved. He felt it was a shame that the applicants had previously taken bad advice, as when installing the doors, they were advised they did not need planning permission.

 

In response to public statements the officer stated that the Parish Council had maintained their objections to the proposal.

 

The Chairman proposed a motion that listed building consent and planning permission with conditions, as set out in the report, be granted, as per the officer recommendation. This was seconded by Cllr Ian Blair-Pilling.

 

A debate followed where the following issues were discussed. Many of the councillors felt that there did not seem to be any substantial harm caused from an ecological point of view. Birds and bats were still using the building and the informatives also provided alternatives. There was no change of use and no harm to the fabric of the building or the locality. The long-term viability of the building was enhanced and the doors were sympathetic and of the style supported by Historic England when adapting buildings of this kind.

 

However, many councillors were disappointed that this was a retrospective application, although that was not a reason to refuse the application now.

 

At the conclusion of the debate it was;

 

Resolved:

 

That listed building consent and planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

 

20/03194/LBC

No time limit is required as the works have already been carried out.  Therefore the following are recommended:

 

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

 

·       Design & Access Statement

·       Drawing no. 200339-01 – Location Plan

·       Drawing no. 3669-001 Rev B – General Arrangement Plan

 

Dated as received 14^th April 2020.

 

·       Drawing no. 200339-101 –Barn elevations and floor plan showing original openings

·       Drawing no. 200339-100 – Barn elevations and floor plans showing new screen doors

·       Drawing no. 200339-1 – Door Jamb Detail

·       Drawing no. 200339-1A – Opening Jamb Detail

·       Drawing no. 200339-2 – Door Head Detail

·       Drawing no. 200339-2A – Opening Head Detail

·       Heritage Statement by Forum Heritage Services

·       Inspection Survey for Bat Roost and Bird Nesting Potential by All Ecology

·       Schedule of works

 

Dated as received 31^st July 2020.

 

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

2.    INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT

The applicant should note that the approval of this application does not include the change of use to the building. 

 

3.    INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT

The applicant should note that under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) and the Habitats Regulations (2010) it is an offence to disturb or harm any protected species including roosting bats. The protection extends beyond the individual animals to the places they use for shelter or resting. Please note that this consent does not override the statutory protection afforded to any such species.  In the event that your proposals could potentially affect a protected species you should seek the advice of a suitably qualified and experienced ecologist and consider the need for a licence from Natural England prior to commencing works.  Please see Natural England’s website for further information on protected species.

 

4.    INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT

General enhancement where impacts low: Although no evidence of bats and birds was found during the survey of the existing buildings, the proposed development offers an opportunity to incorporate features for bats and birds as part of the construction of the replacement dwelling, annex and garage, as a biodiversity enhancement in accordance with paragraph 175 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  As an enhancement, roosting opportunities can be incorporated into buildings at very little cost, such as integral bat bricks (e.g. http://www.ibstock.com/sustainability-ecozone.asp ), bat tubes (e.g. http://www.nhbs.com/2fr_schwegler_bat_tube_tefno_162812.html ) or Habibat (http://www.habibat.co.uk/ ), which will not interfere with the living space of the building and require no maintenance. Other products are available from alternative suppliers. The Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) website provides a product list that may be useful to the applicant / agent (http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/new_build.html ). Similar products are also available for nesting birds.

 

 

20/04069/FUL

No time limit is required as the works have already been carried out.  Therefore the following are recommended:

 

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

 

·       Design & Access Statement

·       Drawing no. 200339-01 – Location Plan

·       Drawing no. 3669-001 Rev B – General Arrangement Plan

 

The above dated as received 11^th June 2020.

 

·       Drawing no. 200339-101 –Barn elevations and floor plan showing original openings

·       Drawing no. 200339-100 – Barn elevations and floor plans showing new screen doors

·       Drawing no. 200339-1 – Door Jamb Detail

·       Drawing no. 200339-1A – Opening Jamb Detail

·       Drawing no. 200339-2 – Door Head Detail

·       Drawing no. 200339-2A – Opening Head Detail

·       Heritage Statement by Forum Heritage Services

·       Inspection Survey for Bat Roost and Bird Nesting Potential by All Ecology

·       Schedule of works

 

The above dated as received 31^st July 2020.

 

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

2.    INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT

The applicant should note that the approval of this application does not include the change of use to the building. 

 

3.    INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT

The applicant should note that under the terms of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) and the Habitats Regulations (2010) it is an offence to disturb or harm any protected species including roosting bats. The protection extends beyond the individual animals to the places they use for shelter or resting. Please note that this consent does not override the statutory protection afforded to any such species.  In the event that your proposals could potentially affect a protected species you should seek the advice of a suitably qualified and experienced ecologist and consider the need for a licence from Natural England prior to commencing works.  Please see Natural England’s website for further information on protected species.

 

4.    INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT

General enhancement where impacts low: Although no evidence of bats and birds was found during the survey of the existing buildings, the proposed development offers an opportunity to incorporate features for bats and birds as part of the construction of the replacement dwelling, annex and garage, as a biodiversity enhancement in accordance with paragraph 175 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  As an enhancement, roosting opportunities can be incorporated into buildings at very little cost, such as integral bat bricks (e.g. http://www.ibstock.com/sustainability-ecozone.asp ), bat tubes (e.g. http://www.nhbs.com/2fr_schwegler_bat_tube_tefno_162812.html) or Habibat (http://www.habibat.co.uk/), which will not interfere with the living space of the building and require no maintenance. Other products are available from alternative suppliers. The Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) website provides a product list that may be useful to the applicant / agent (http://www.bats.org.uk/pages/new_build.html ). Similar products are also available for nesting birds.