Appeal 3356807

The appeal is dismissed.

This is the effect on the setting of [name], a building listed as being of special architectural or historical interest ([name]).

The appeal property is located at the end of a lengthy drive which connects to the Cricklade interchange on the A419. The drive also serves some commercial uses and a residential caravan site. At the end of the drive is a small cluster of development, amongst which is [name].

I have been provided with a full description of the listed building. The reasons for the designation are that it is a good example of a late Georgian stone farmhouse, using good quality materials and craftmanship expressing local vernacular traditions, and its plan form has remained mostly intact and includes some good quality features that illustrate the historic development of the building.

Attached to the listed building is [site address] , the appeal property. This is a two-storey dwelling with a large conservatory at the front. It appears to have been extended by means of a subservient two-storey side extension, with dormers in the roof. Beyond the extension is a flat roofed car port, the roof being supported by thin pillars. Beyond the car port is a gravelled open area used for car parking. [site address] is fronted by a largely lawned garden.

The intention is to build the proposed garage and store on the open area beyond the car port. It would be a two-storey building with dormers facing the front to match the extension to the host property. All the buildings, extensions and space to the north of the Farmhouse, including the buildings described above, fall comfortably within the Farmhouse’s setting.

The listed building’s setting in my view is already materially affected by the development that has taken place in close proximity to it, including [site address] , its various additions, and the factory building to the rear. [site address] and its additions have developed in linear fashion, to be completely at odds with the plan form of the listed building. The extant development detracts from the setting. The linearity of development would be accentuated were this proposal to proceed causing further harm to the Farmhouse’s setting. The appellant’s brief grounds of appeal do not persuade me that the Council’s decision was wrong.

All other matters raised in the representations have been considered, including the references to the National Planning Policy Framework, and the comments made by the Cricklade Town Council have been taken into account. No other matter is of such strength or significance as to outweigh those considerations that led to my

I conclude that the proposed development would harm the setting of [name] contrary to the provisions of Core Policy 58 of the [name] which serves to ensure that Wiltshire’s heritage assets are protected and enhanced.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.