West Calf. Close. Water Point. Hazelbank Farm. Moss End Cottage. Oughtershaw C/13/187. Stone

Transcription

1 Beck Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority Application Code: Committee Date: 10/04/2018 Location: Barn, Oughtershaw Low Bull Ing West Calf Little Calf FB Oughtershaw Cattle Grid Waterfall Stone West Calf Fall Barn Water Treatment Works Fall Barn Track Danehill Farm Hazelbank Farm Water Point TCB The Reading Rooms LB Water Gap Riggs Moss End Cottage Oughtershaw Low Oughtershaw Beck West Calf Cattle Grid Waterfall Stone Fall Barn Danehill Farm FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY. NO FURTHER COPIES TO BE MADE Water Point The Crown copyright and database rights 2017 Ordnance Survey Additional information: Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority

2 YORKSHIRE DALES NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Planning Committee 10 April 2018 Schedule No:1 Application No: District: Parish: Applicant's Name: Grid Ref: Craven Buckden Mr N Pearson, SD Received by YDNP: 20/12/2017 Officer: Peter Eggleton PROPOSAL: LOCATION: full planning permission for conversion of barn to create local occupancy dwelling or holiday let, erection of single storey lean-to extension and installation of package treatment plant Barn, Oughtershaw CONSULTEES Buckden PC Highways North Yorkshire CEHO Craven Fire & Rescue Service Natural England Senior Listed Building Fully supports Visibility is acceptable. Recommends conditions. Any potential contamination is likely to be isolated. Sound insulation and noise reduction should be considered with regard to BS8233:2014 Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings. Regard should be had for the safe removal of any potential asbestos, ensure that dust is controlled and any topsoil brought on site should be free from contaminates. Recommends conditions. [Given the issolation of the building, these are all matters that would be satisfactorily controlled through the Building Regulation process] Water supply and emergency services access satisfactory. This application is in close proximity to Oughtershaw & Beckemonds Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Natural England is satisfied that the proposed development being carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application, as submitted, will not damage or destroy the interest features for which the sites have been notified. This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. This is a very late Type-C field barn (1926 interwar

3 Officer Schedule No:1 period) built in the traditional style; the only difference to a historic field barn is that it has some original concrete flooring and the internal lighting has been improved by installing a window opposite each entrance. Given the lack of any contemporary or later traditional field barns, it is quite special and perhaps unique in that regard. The link to the Woodd family is of further interest. There are other buildings connected to them such as Oughtershaw Hall and the former school and chapel, now grade II listed. The initials over the barn door refer to Reverend Trevor Basil Woodd ( ) of Oughtershaw Hall and vicar in London. Wildlife Conservation Officer Trees & Woodlands Minerals Officer PUBLIC RESPONSES The barn should not be extended as it would have a harmful impact on the heritage significance of the field barn. No new enclosure (for creating a car park) should be formed due to the impact this would have on the setting of this heritage asset and the historic field pattern. [This has been amended]. The patio outside the curtilage should be omitted all the above points demonstrate that the proposal would extend beyond the footprint of the historic site. [This has been reduced in scale but not omitted within the amended plans] The relocation (raising) of existing openings (forking holes) should not be permitted [This has been satisfactorily altered by the amended plans]. All unnecessary new window openings and roof lights should be omitted, with the removal of windows taking precedence. Roof lights to be conservation type. [The number of new openings has been reduced but This application is supported by a bat and bird survey report (prepared by Envirotech and dated 25/10/17). A condition should be imposed to the effect that the precautionary bat mitigation be carried out that is outlined in section of the report. Informative notes concerning bats and nesting birds should be added. Proposal to erect a bird nesting box on one gable end and a bat box at the other is welcomed. The Root Protection Zone (RPZ) of the ash tree should be shown to establish that the proposed hardstanding and wall would not result in harmful compaction of the ground. The potential for new planting should also be considered. [The amended plans do not conflict with the RPZ]. No concerns.

4 Schedule No:1 None received. RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES L1(15) - Heritage assets L2(15) - Conversion of traditional building - acceptable uses L3(15) - Conversion of traditional buildings - building treatment W1(15) - Wildlife sites, species and networks W2(15) - Biodiversity enhancement SP1(15) - Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development SP2(15) - National Park Purposes SP4(15) - Development Quality OFFICER OBSERVATIONS UPDATE REPORT The application was considered at the March Committee when it was resolved: That consideration of the application be deferred to allow time for discussions to take place between Officers and the applicant with a view to reducing the size of the extension. Revised plans have been received which illustrate an extension to the barn that would represent a 33% increase in floor space over that of the original barn. It would accommodate a kitchen/dining room and would increase the size of the enclosed patio area. The combined area of new development including the enclosed patio area is similar to the shown on the previous plans. Policy L3 allows for the change of use of buildings providing it has the physical capacity to accommodate the new use without significant extension or alteration; and alterations are the minimum necessary and are sensitive to the traditional character and appearance of the building and do not adversely affect the immediate or wider landscape setting. The new kitchen/dining room would continue to provide a significant increase in accommodation and would undoubtedly represent a significant extension and alteration to the building. Although the applicant advises that the accommodation may in the future be required for a family member who may also work on the farm, this does not represent exceptional circumstances that would set this proposal aside from any other application for the conversion of a traditional barn. If approved, the proposal would set a new bench mark for barn conversions whereby all applicants would wish to have a kitchen off the main building with a fully glazed screen wall that represented a 33% increase in floor space. The exposed position of this barn with all elevations open to public view, would increase the importance of this proposal as a precedent. At present, applicants are advised that all accommodation must be contained within the original building so as to comply with the clear requirements of the policy and the Design Guide. The change of use of the barn to a residential use, including new openings, the new parking area and the provision of a garden, will significantly change its character. Policy L3 accepts such alterations providing that they are the minimum necessary. The proposal includes two new door openings into the barn which are not considered to be necessary.

5 Schedule No:1 The gable door in particular detracts from the simple form of that elevation and the prominence and importance of the forking hole. The proposed extension, which would detract from the original form of the barn, will result in considerable harm to the character of the building in this very exposed setting. The proposal therefore continues to conflict with the requirements of policy L3 and the recently adopted Design Guide. The recommendation therefore remains as set out in the original report below. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION This application is reported to Committee because the Parish Council recommendation is contrary to the decision which the Head of Development Management proposes to take and as the application has been called to Committee by Mr Blackie. APPLICATION SITE The application concerns a traditional barn just to the north of the settlement of Oughtershaw. It is set slightly back from the road with an access over the culverted stream which passes under the highway and to the front of the application site. The barn is dated 1926 which makes it one of the last traditional barns to have been built. It stands in isolation from other development and the rising land to the north ensures that it is prominent and visible in its entirety from the Oughtershaw Road. PROPOSAL The proposal is to convert the building for use as a holiday let for 5 years or more with the possibility that it may then be used by the son of the applicant should he wish to live and work on the farm in the future. The conversion would involve the addition of a large extension, which would represent an increase in the footprint by 47%. A new patio area would be created outside the new extension. A new door in the north gable and an opening in the west elevation, in addition three roof lights would be added. The remaining doors and windows would utilise the existing openings. Access would be via the existing field gate. A parking space is shown within the existing walled forecourt. A turning area would be provided adjacent to the side of the barn. The majority of the garden area would be contained within the walled area to the front of the property. KEY ISSUES: Principle of development Impact on character and appearance of the area including non-designated heritage assets Impact on biodiversity PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT Policy L2 of the Local Plan 2016 (LP) accepts the conversion of traditional barns in certain circumstances. These include suitable roadside locations. This barn falls within that category. The policy also requires that barns be subject to occupancy restrictions which would be secured by way of a legal undertaking. The applicant advises that the use would be for holiday let with the potential for local occupancy use. Both a local occupancy use and a use for short stay holiday lets would accord with the policy. Subject to the detailed requirements of policies L1, L3 and SP4, the principle of retaining and re-using such a building for residential purposes gains support from policy L2. This policy supports the sustainability objectives of policy SP1 and is designed to help conserve the cultural heritage of the National Park in accordance with policy SP2. Overall, the

6 Schedule No:1 general principle of conversion, in these particular circumstances, accords with local plan policy. IMPACT ON CHARACTER AND APPEARANCE OF THE BUILDING AND AREA The barn is of considerable significance being one of the last traditional barns to have been built in the Dales and also because of its historical association with the Woodd family. It is also located in an extremely exposed location so that all elevations are in clear public view. The proposal would include the addition of a large side extension. This would be almost half the footprint of the original barn and would represent a substantial addition. The first requirement of policy L3 is that barns have the physical capacity to accommodate the new use without significant extension or alteration, and all ancillary storage and services are accommodated in the existing buildings rather than through the provision of new ancillary buildings. The recently adopted Design Guide similarly states that Traditional buildings proposed for conversion should be large enough to accommodate the new use without significant extension. If the building is too small for the use proposed, it is likely to be unsuitable for that particular use. This proposal would therefore be clearly contrary to the local plan policy and the Design Guide and given the scale of the extension and its exposed location, if permitted, the decision would entirely undermine both the local plan policy and the Design Guide. Although this is not a large barn it is clearly large enough to accommodate a two bedroom dwelling without the need for an extension. The first floor would include two double bedrooms and two bathrooms. The proposed ground floor would include a further bathroom and a large utility room, along with a good sized lounge. The extension would accommodate the kitchen and dining area. The ground floor area of the original barn is of sufficient size to accommodate a kitchen/dining area and living room without the need for an extension, although the third bathroom in this two bedroom property would be lost. Furthermore, the barn benefits from a large number of existing openings which would allow its re-use without the need for any additional openings. The barn therefore is relatively unique in that it not only has the capacity for conversion, it also has sufficient openings to allow this without the need for new external works. No justification has been provided with regard to why an extension has been included. The application followed pre-application advice which clearly set out the policy constraints. It is suggested that the son of the applicant may wish to live in the property in the long term (after more than 5 years) and may wish to work on the farm. Given the uncertainty in relation to this possible future use, it is not possible to consider the proposal as an agricultural workers dwelling and no need for such a dwelling has been provided. In any event, policy C3, which relates to such uses, does not suggest that a departure from the requirements of policy L3 should be accepted. The large extension would detract from the distinctive form of the barn. The additional openings, particularity the new door in the gable, would also domesticate the appearance of the barn. These elements would detract from the original character and appearance of the barn and would be harmful to the significance of the barn as a non-designated heritage asset. Policy L1 is clear that non-designated heritage assets that are demonstrably of equivalent significance to designated heritage assets will be determined in accordance with the policy for designated assets. Harm will not be accepted unless the public benefits of the proposal clearly outweigh the loss of significance. The supporting text advises that proposals will be

7 Schedule No:1 required to present clear and compelling justification for accepting loss or harm. No such evidence has been presented and as the barn could be converted, achieving the same benefits but with less harm than the current proposal, it would conflict with policy L1. It would fail to conserve or enhance the significance of the building and would actually be harmful to it. The proposal also includes a new turning and parking area. This has been reduced from the originally submitted plans but is still not considered to be the minimum or most contained area possible. This part of the site is entirely exposed to view from the raised position of the road. It is essential therefore that the changes resulting from the parking and turning are kept to a minimum as they will have a significant impact on the setting of the building and will result in a domestic appearance if not adequately controlled. Policy L3 is clear that such areas, including garden areas, are kept to a minimum and are sensitive to the traditional character and appearance of buildings and do not adversely affect the immediate or wider landscape setting of the building. As presently set out, the access and turning area, which would inevitably be used for parking, would fail to satisfy these requirements and would add to the main concerns with regard to the changes to the building. Overall, the proposal would clearly be at odds with local plan policy L3 and the Design Guide. It would detract from the heritage significance of this non-designated heritage asset, contrary to policy L1, and it would detract from the character and appearance of the building and the wider area. As the building could be converted without new openings and without an extension, the weight that can be afforded to the provision of a new dwelling and the maintenance of the barn, is reduced. The proposal represents poor design in this context and would also be contrary to the detailed design requirements of policy SP4. The details would not therefore satisfy the sustainability objectives of policy SP1 and would detract from the cultural heritage of the National Park, contrary to policy SP2. BIODIVERSITY The proposal would not result in any impact on the nearby SSSI. The application is supported by a bat and bird survey. A condition requiring the precautionary bat mitigation suggested together with an informative regarding bat and bird disturbance would satisfy the requirements of policy W1 with regard to protecting wildlife. The proposal suggests the erection of a bird nesting box and a bat box on the building. The proposal also provides the opportunity for additional tree planting in the vicinity which would enhance biodiversity and would improve the appearance of the immediate area. These provisions would satisfy the objectives of policy W2 with regard to biodiversity protection and enhancement. ANALYSIS OF MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS The Local Plan and the Design Guide offer support for the conversion of this building given its quality and roadside position. The barn can however be converted without the need for any new openings or an extension. No justification has been provided in relation to why such significant changes to the building are proposed. The benefits of the proposal with regard to the maintenance and protection of the building and the provision of a new dwelling would therefore be no greater than the benefits associated with a conversion not requiring such an addition. The alterations, including the larger than necessary parking and turning area, the substantial extension and the unnecessary new openings, would result in an unnecessarily domestic appearance of the final dwelling and would detract from both the character and setting of this non-designated heritage asset. The proposal would be contrary to the

8 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the application be refused for the following reasons: Schedule No:1 objectives of the National Park as it would detract from the cultural heritage of the area and would undermine the policies that are essential to maintain the existing character of the National Park into the future. The extension and other works would be clearly contrary to policy L3 as the proposal would detract from the character, appearance and setting of the building. Given that the benefits of the proposal could be achieved without the extension, it would also conflict with the heritage requirements of policy L1. As the works would represent poor design in this context, it would be contrary to policy SP4 and the sustainability objectives of policy SP1. The National Planning Policy Framework requires that applications are determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case, the barn is particularly sensitive to change because of its heritage significance and its exposed and isolated setting. No specific considerations have been put forward to justify such a clear departure from the development plan policies. Accepting such development would clearly undermine the development plan policies and would be contrary to the requirements of planning legislation as no material considerations have been put forward that would outweigh the policies of the development plan. In the opinion of the local planning authority, the proposed extension and alterations would detract from the heritage significance of this non-designated heritage asset and would detract from the character and appearance of the building and the wider area. It would be contrary to the requirements of policies L1, L3, SP1, SP2 and SP4 of the Yorkshire Dales National Park Local Plan and to the adopted Design Guide 2017.