Appeal 6000530

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the erection of [name] at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/10365, subject to the following conditions:

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawings: Location Plan, Block Plan, (1)[name] and (4)[name] and Roof Plan.

No development above ground level shall take place until details and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details / samples.

The glazing to be fitted in the windows and lantern roof light of the orangery hereby approved shall be high performance low-emissivity Planitherm 4S glazing (or equivalent) and shall be retained as such for the life of the development.

The appeal site is within the Damerham Conservation Area (DCA) wherein I have a statutory duty under Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act) to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the area.

The main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area, giving special regard to its effect on the host building as a Non- Designated Heritage Asset (NDHA), the DCA and the Cranborne Chase National Landscape (CCNL).

The appeal property is a dwelling housed in a former [name] which dates from 1863, the significance of which is derived from its age, its former use and the simple vernacular character of the historic core of the building. The dwelling is located to the rear of ‘[address]’ which fronts [site address] and is accessed via a private track. Both properties are located within the DCA. The DCA boundary runs down the western side of [site address] and around the plot boundary of [address] and the appeal property. Open fields surround the appeal property to the north, west and south which form part of the CCNL.

Damerham is situated on both sides of the [name]. The special interest and significance of the DCA is largely derived from the architectural richness and variety of its historic buildings. These buildings are constructed from a mix of traditional local materials including chalk cob cottages with thatched roofs; timber framing, infilled with brick or clad with weatherboarding on agricultural buildings and brick, sometimes concealing an earlier material underneath, and frequently banded with flints and roofs of clay tile, slate or corrugated iron. The conservation area includes water meadows and fields as well as playing fields and the Church.

The listed buildings within the DCA include both dwellings and agricultural buildings and include the Church of [name] ([name]) and [address] ([name]*). Its historical significance derives from its main estate belonging to [name] for nearly six hundred years. This special interest and significance are further underpinned by green space, narrow hedged lanes, and the open and rural nature of the DCA’s fringes and wider surroundings.

The open fields and farmland alongside the western boundary of [site address] provides an attractive open countryside setting to Damerham. This creates a spacious and undeveloped character and appearance. Due to the topography of the surrounding area and the appeal site’s position behind ‘[address],’ the site is not visible from the wider DCA. Nonetheless, due to its architectural interest the property makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area.

The proposal would involve the construction of a single storey orangery with lantern rooflight to the rear of the property adding an additional 20sq.m of floor space. This would be located to the rear of a single storey mono-pitched extension that was constructed prior to the building’s conversion to residential. A two-storey side extension has also been added to the side of the original building. The extensions added to the original building, alongside that now proposed, would equate to an increase in floor space of over 40% of the original chapel building; a figure which is undisputed between parties.

This increase would exceed the 30% limit imposed under Policy DM20 of the New Forest District Council Local Development Framework Local Plan Part 2: Sites and Development Management (2014) (LP2). Nonetheless, the policy explains that flexibility above this may be allowed where the increased floorspace would not result in a dwelling in excess of 100sq.m. In exceptional circumstances, a larger extension may be permitted to a) meet the needs of a family who work in the immediate area or b) meet the design considerations relating to the special character of the building. Flexibility may also be applied where a conservatory is proposed.

No information is before me regarding the floor space of the resultant building or the background of the occupiers of the dwelling, and the proposal would not meet the policy’s definition of a conservatory. Therefore, my assessment requires me to consider whether the proposed design should be regarded as an exception to the policy’s numerical requirement.

I note that the proposal has been reduced in size and amended in design following a previous refusal of planning permission. Whilst the development appears at visual odds when attached to the existing mono-pitched roof of the rear extension, both the existing and the proposed extensions are clearly additions to the main converted chapel, which would remain the dominant building. The additions therefore show a clear design intention to not mimic the original building.

The use of an oak frame would naturally colour to silver to match that of the two-storey side extension. As such, it would complement the historic fabric of [site address] and the rural character of the conservation area. The modern design of the orangery, whilst using traditional materials, would provide a clear and distinguishable extension to the fabric of the main NDHA without affecting its modest scale, linear form, and architectural simplicity. The extension would also be located to the rear of the building which cannot be seen from public vantage points or from the access track to the front of the building. On this basis and despite the Council finding less than substantial harm to the NDHA, I find that no harm would occur to the NDHA’s significance. Furthermore, the proposal would meet the design considerations relating to the special character of the building.

Turning to the DCA, the proposed extension would not be visible from a public vantage point. When assessing the extension against the DCA’s significance, I find that the architectural richness and variety of its buildings alongside its green spaces, narrow hedged lanes and its open and rural nature would not be materially eroded by this modest development. Consequently, I find no harm to the character and appearance of the DCA and thus the setting and thereby the significance of the DCA as a designated heritage asset.

With regards to the appeal site’s location in the CCNL, I have given great weight to the duty imposed by Section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 to seek to further the purpose of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty of National Landscapes. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) advises that great weight should be given to conserving and enhancing this area as it has the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.

The CCNL’s significance relates to the historical interaction of humans and the land. Its key qualities include its diversity, distinctiveness, sense of history and remoteness, dark night skies, tranquillity, and its rural character. Policy PT26 of the Cranborne Chase AONB Management Plan 2019-2024 (CCMP) supports extensions to permanent buildings where it would not materially impact on the qualities of the landscape, especially through its height or bulk and where the size and scale of the proposed extension is not disproportionate to the existing building.

I have already determined that the design, size, and scale of the proposed extension, whilst cumulatively in exceedance of the 30% LP2 requirement, would be in proportion with the existing building and would not harm the significance of the NDHA or DCA. When considering the effect of the proposed extension on the CCNL, I consider that the development would not materially harm the qualities of the landscape and would not be disproportionate to the existing building.

CCNL is noted within the CCMP as having the darkest night skies in central Southern England. The Management Plan identifies that new developments with glass walls and roof lights increase light pollution and have the potential to be harmful to the CCNL. However, the accompanying Design and Access statement identifies that the glazing within the proposal has been reduced following the previous refusal of planning permission and the glazing would have high performance emissivity. Both would result in the proposal creating limited light spill.

As a result, the proposed orangery would not have a harmful effect on the ‘[name] within the CCNL subject to a suitable planning condition to secure the identified glazing specification. On this basis, overall, the proposed development would conserve the CCNL.

Consequently, I find that the proposed development would complement the character and appearance of the area, giving special regard to its effect on the host building as an NDHA, would preserve the significance of the DCA and would conserve the CCNL. Accordingly, the proposed extension would accord with Policies STR2, ENV3 and ENV4 of the New Forest District Council Local Development Framework Local Plan 2016-2036 Part 1: Planning Strategy (July

and Policies DM1 and DM20 of the LP2. These policies, amongst other things, seek development that does not have an unacceptable impact on the CCNL; achieves high quality design of an appropriate scale and appearance in keeping with the rural character of the area that contributes positively to local distinctiveness, quality of life and enhances the character and identity of the locality; retains and/or enhances landscape features and characteristics; and conserves and if possible enhances the historic environment and heritage assets.

I have a duty under s66(1) of the LBCA Act to have special regard to the desirability of preserving listed buildings or their settings or any features of special architectural or historic interest which they possess. [address], located to the front of the appeal property is [name] listed and is circa 17th and 19th Century. Its significance relates to its architectural interest including its timber-frame structure with brick infill, cob rebuilding and additions and thatch roof. Given the degree of separation between the listed building and the appeal property and that the proposed development would be located at the rear of [site address] building, I consider that the setting of ‘[address]’ would be preserved and its significance would not be harmed.

The Framework states that conditions should be kept to a minimum and only imposed where they are necessary, relevant to planning and to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise, and reasonable in all other aspects. I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council against the Framework and where necessary I have amended the wording in the interests of effectiveness and precision.

To ensure certainty and clarity, I have imposed the standard conditions relating to the commencement of development and approved plans.

A condition requiring details of materials is necessary to ensure that the materials used are appropriate for the site and surrounding area. A condition to secure the use of high performance low-emissivity Planitherm 4S glazing (or equivalent) in the development is also considered necessary to limit light spill in a ‘[name] area.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.