Appeal 6003848

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 drawing nos. 2021-L1, 2021-L2, 2021-P1, 2021-P1.1 and 2021-P2F.

The appeal is allowed and listed building consent is granted for the replacement of existing side extension and an orangery extension to the other side, internal and associated external alterations of the existing annexe known as the [address] at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application [name]/25/02493/LB, subject to the following conditions:

The works authorised by this consent shall begin not later than three years from the date of this consent.

The works hereby authorised shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos. 2021-L1, 2021-L2, 2021-P1, 2021-P1.1 and 2021-P2F. Appeal Decisions 6003847 and 6003848

Details of materials, including finishes, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to any work of building construction being undertaken on site, and the approved works shall be undertaken thereafter strictly in accordance with the approved details.

Details of all new windows and doors shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to any work of new window or door installation on site, and the approved works shall thereafter be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved details.

Details of all new junctions between the existing structure and the proposed extensions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to any work of building construction being undertaken on site, and the approved works shall thereafter be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved details.

Details of the new internal stairs, including materials and finishes, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to any work of stair installation being undertaken on site, and the approved works shall thereafter be undertaken strictly in accordance with the approved details.

Any works of internal and external ‘making good’ required as a result of implementation of the works hereby approved shall be undertaken with materials and in a manner which are strictly compatible with, and fully maintaining, the traditional constructional fabric, detailing and character of the building, closely matching with existing materials as appropriate.

[site address] is a [name] listed building1 referred to as [address] in the list entry that was last amended in 1985. To avoid any confusion, my decisions refer to the building by its current name, rather than the list entry name. [address] is a separate building within the grounds of [site address] and is the focus of the proposal before these two appeals.

The description of the proposal on the initial application form simply reads “extensions and alterations to existing coach house”. However, the description used in the banner heading and formal decisions above is taken from the Council’s decision notice and the appeal form as it more clearly describes the proposal.

At my site visit, I observed that various works have already been carried out to [address]. This included the removal of most window and door frames and most internal fittings, the repair and replacement of external brickwork, the partial demolition of the existing single storey side extension, and the installation of breeze blocks and new flooring on the first floor. The works were incomplete at the time of my visit and the building was effectively an empty shell with several blank openings, no chimneystack, and limited internal subdivision.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have assessed this proposal based on the plans before me rather than any changes that might have occurred on site in recent months. Any changes not covered by this proposal and my formal decisions are a matter for the appellant and the Council to address separately. 1 List entry number 1321710 Appeal Decisions 6003847 and 6003848

The main issue for both appeals is the effect of the proposal on the special interest of the [name] listed building at [site address] , including the [address], and the character and appearance of Steppingley Conservation Area.

[site address] dates from the 18th century with later extensions and is a large two storey red brick building with clay tiled roofs and brick chimneys. The listed building has architectural and historic qualities as an imposing residential property formerly used as the village rectory which contribute greatly to its special interest and significance. The property has a spacious garden to the side and rear which is enclosed by mature planting. This garden makes a positive contribution to the listed building as part of its setting.

[address] is a smaller two storey property on the rear boundary of the garden. It evidently originates from the 19th century and is constructed from red brick with a slate roof. The windows are single timber glazed casement with doors to match. Most of the internal fittings appear to have been modern insertions completed when the building was converted to residential use, although there are some surviving historic timber beams and brickwork. A fireplace separates the lounge and dining area with a chimneystack in the middle of the front roof slope.

The appellant and the Council agree that the [address] falls within the curtilage of the listed building which means it has formed part of the land since before 1 July 1948. Therefore, it is curtilage listed for the purposes of planning and listed building control. As an ancillary historic building to [site address] within its spacious grounds, the [address] makes a positive contribution to the special interest and significance of the listed building.

Steppingley Conservation Area covers most of the village with the church and a public house at its centre and a series of roads radiating outwards including [site address] . The conservation area contains a range of historic buildings from grand properties to smaller estate cottages, as well as notable areas of green space. These elements contribute positively to the character and appearance of the conservation area and inform its significance.

The appeal site is located wholly with the conservation area. The site includes both [site address] and the [address] and so makes a positive contribution to the conservation area. The rear elevation of the [address] can also be seen in views from a public footpath to the south, looking across an intervening field into the conservation area.

The proposal involves the replacement of the existing side extension and the erection of a single storey orangery on the opposite side. The plans also note the like for like replacement of windows and doors on the front and rear elevations albeit with ‘heritage style vacuum glazing’ to presumably provide double glazing. The door and window on the side elevation for the orangery would be removed along with a section of brickwork to create a new internal opening. The only other alterations shown in the plans are the removal of brickwork on the dining area wall to create an opening for a double sided log burner and a new staircase. Appeal Decisions 6003847 and 6003848

The replacement side extension would step forward by around one metre from the existing extension but would still be positioned behind the front elevation of the main building with a similar gable roof and materials. The orangery would have a similar front building line and so would also be set back from the main building. Its roof would be somewhat unusual with glazing around the top half but would otherwise be a conventional hipped design. The large number of windows along the front and side elevations would reflect its intended use as an orangery or conservatory and would help to reduce the overall bulk.

Despite the increase in built footprint and volume, the two extensions would be subservient to the main part of the [address] and would utilise sympathetic materials and design. Consequently, they would have an acceptable effect on the listed building and the [address], as well as the conservation area. The orangery can be attached to the side elevation using reversible bolt fixings which would limit any loss of historic fabric.

Turning to the external and internal alterations, while the plans and photographs submitted by the appellant show the design of the existing windows and doors, no detailed information has been provided on their dimensions or condition. However, it is evident that they are modern features and in need of some refurbishment. Subject to suitably designed replacements, their loss would not be harmful. The same applies to the staircase which is modern based on the evidence before me. The removal of brickwork on the side elevation for the orangery would be kept to a minimum and would allow for better internal circulation. Provided the chimney breast and stack remain, the loss of a small area of internal wall for the double sided fireplace would also have a minimal impact.

Taken as a whole, despite the limited information on historic fabric and proposed replacements, the external and internal alterations shown on the plans would have an acceptable effect on the [address], the listed building and the conservation area, subject to suitably worded conditions.

In conclusion, the proposal in both appeals would preserve the special interest of the [name] listed building at [site address] , including the [address], and would preserve the character and appearance of Steppingley Conservation Area having regard to Sections 16, 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. No harm would be caused to the significance of these heritage assets. Therefore, the proposal would accord with Policies HQ1 and HE3 of the Central Bedfordshire Local Plan 2015-2035 which, among other things, seek high quality design and schemes that sustain and enhance heritage assets and provide sufficient assessment of their impact. These aims are reflected in Section 5 of the [name] 2023.

The proposal would also accord with Sections 12 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which seek to achieve well-designed places and conserve the historic environment, with paragraph 207 requiring sufficient information to understand the effect of a proposal on the significance of any

The site is located within the South Bedfordshire Green Belt where development is inappropriate unless one of the exceptions in NPPF paragraph 154 applies. The parties agree that the extensions and alterations to the building would not result in Appeal Decisions 6003847 and 6003848 disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building and I have no reason to disagree. Therefore, the proposal would not be inappropriate development in the Green Belt.

An interested party has expressed concerns regarding notification of the proposal, but I am content based on the Council’s information that adequate consultation has been carried out including the use of site notices. Concerns regarding effects on party walls is a civil matter separate to the planning process.

There are mature trees close to the [address], but the Council has not identified any conditions in relation to potential effects. The plans do not indicate any significant arboricultural implications, but the appellant is advised to check with the Council first, mindful that the site is subject to both a conservation area designation and a tree preservation order where certain legal requirements apply.

A preliminary roost assessment has not been requested by the Council, but the appellant should nevertheless take care when carrying out works to the building and check first for any evidence of bats. Should such evidence be found, work should cease and the appellant should seek advice from the relevant bodies.

Time limit and plans conditions are needed on both appeals for clarity and compliance. The plans conditions include plan ref 2021-P1 ([name], Elevations and Sections) for the avoidance of doubt. I have not imposed a condition requiring that the building is only used as an annexe to [site address] as the change of use has already occurred as set out in the evidence before me and the proposal is for alterations and extensions only.

Notwithstanding the details already submitted with the proposal, conditions relating to materials, windows/doors, new junctions between the existing building and the proposed extensions, the internal staircase, and the making good of any works are necessary for Appeal B to ensure that the special interest of the listed building is safeguarded.

For the above reasons, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that both appeals should be allowed.