Appeal 6003860

Appeal A is dismissed.

Appeal B is dismissed.

The appeals concern the same site and the same development and works. Although the legislative regimes are different, to reduce repetition, I have dealt with both appeals together in my reasoning and in a single decision letter.

The appeal site is a listed building located within a conservation area. In determining the appeals, I have therefore had special regard to the statutory duties set out in sections (s) 16(2), 66(1) and 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (The Act).

For Appeal A, as well as referring to s66(1) and s72(1) of the Act, the decision notice refers to the requirements of s16(2) of the Act. However, this section concerns ‘whether to grant listed building consent for any works’. As Appeal A concerns‘ whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting’, assessment against s16(2) does not apply. I have therefore determined Appeal A on this basis.

For Appeal B, as wells as referring to s16(2) of the Act, the decision notice refers to the requirements of s66(1) of the Act. As set out above, because s66(1) relates to a grant of planning permission and Appeal B concerns an application for listed building consent, assessment against s66(1) does not apply. I have therefore determined Appeal B on this basis.

As the requirements of s66(1) and s16(2) of the Act are the same, namely, to have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses, I consider that the interests of no party have been prejudiced by this approach.

For Appeal B, although not referred to in the decision notice, I have a duty to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the conservation area in accordance with the statutory duty set out in s72(1) of the Act. Since this matter has already been addressed by the parties in relation to Appeal A, I am satisfied my consideration of it in relation to Appeal B would not be prejudicial to any party.

The Council granted planning permission ([name]/2019/2342/FUL) and listed building consent ([name]/2019/2343/LBC) for extensions and alterations to [site address] on 17 January 2020 (the 2020 permissions). The 2020 permissions include conditions requiring the development and works to be carried out in accordance with approved plans. However, a glazed roof lantern has been installed that was not shown on the approved plans. The appeals seek to regularise this addition through the variation of the approved plans to allow the roof lantern to be retained.

The main issues in both appeals are whether the condition remains reasonable and necessary in the interests of preserving the [name] listed building known as ‘ [site address] West’1 or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses; and in the interests of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Brackley Town Centre Conservation Area. 1 National Heritage List for England, list entry number 1376511

The Grade II listed [site address] West ( [site address] ) is an end two-storey dwelling attached to, but slightly set back from [address] (No 50). It fronts the north side of the main street through the town of Brackley behind a low stone wall. The main entrance to the dwelling is on the side elevation facing the property’s driveway and a high stone wall that surrounds neighbouring [address] School. [site address] is constructed of coursed limestone and the carved stone entrance door lintel on the side elevation is dated 1897. It includes multiple mullion windows, two tall decorative brick chimneys and a projecting stone string course. The primary front elevation includes a gabled projecting front bay which is canted at ground floor level and is a corbelled, squared bay at first floor level. The list entry notes the building was listed in September 1998 and that it also has group value with No 50, [address] School and its surrounding wall.

The rear elevation of [site address] possesses less detail than the front and side elevations and has been previously extended at ground floor level with a sizeable pitch roof extension linked to an earlier flat roof addition. The pitch roof extension incorporates a modern timber glazed bay at the rear and a substantial-sized chimney stack at the side. A detached part stone, part brick garage has also been erected close to the rear extensions.

Whilst these additions increase the footprint of the dwelling, from the information before me, they were constructed prior to the date of listing and, given their single storey form and use of appropriate materials, they are largely sensitive to the historic core of the asset. Importantly, the two projecting first-floor gables and first-floor mullion windows at the rear remain clearly visible when viewed from the rear garden. Therefore, even though the listed building has been altered in the past, its overall historic form remains legible.

From the evidence before me, the special interest and significance of the listed building insofar as it relates to these appeals, is mainly attributed to its architectural and historic interest as a good example of a local domestic property from the 19th century. Important contributing factors in this regard are the use of traditional methods of construction and materials, the building’s surviving historic fabric and the legibility of its historic plan form.

[site address] is located in the Brackley Town Centre Conservation Area (the CA). Its character and appearance are largely shaped by an extensive collection of historic buildings lining a broad central street, with long, narrow burgage plots extending behind. The Brackley Town Centre Conservation Appraisal, adopted July 2012, notes that Brackley is one of only two towns in the county where a medieval planned town was developed at a distance from the earlier village from which it takes its name.

From the evidence before me, the special interest and significance of the CA are largely derived from the evolution of a medieval market town and the preservation of its historic centre, street pattern and burgage plots, along with the architectural richness and variety of its historic buildings. [site address] adds considerably to Brackley’s historic and aesthetic charm. In doing so it positively contributes to the character and appearance of the CA as a whole and thereby to its significance as a designated heritage asset.

A projecting roof lantern has been installed within the flat roof of a previous addition to the building’s rear elevation.

Due to its height, the roof lantern adds visual clutter to the already altered rear elevation. Moreover, given its position directly in front of the first floor mullion window and the use of thick powder coated metal framing, particularly in the lower part of the roof lantern, it jars with the natural stone surrounds and thin-framed leaded lights of this window. Although the roof lantern is relatively small in scale in the context of other additions to the rear elevation, and is adjacent to a parapet wall, it is nonetheless an additional inharmonious appendage on the building which further erodes its architectural and historic interest.

A situation where what has been built does not conform to what has been approved does not necessarily make it unacceptable in terms of the preservation of the heritage asset. However, in this case, for the reasons given above, the roof lantern fails to preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building and harms its significance as a designated heritage asset .

The roof lantern is not visible from the public domain, but listed buildings are safeguarded for their inherent architectural and historic interest irrespective of whether or not public views of the building can be gained. However, in terms of the effect on the CA as a whole, given the size and position of the roof lantern, the distinctive architectural authority of the listed building’s charismatic front and side elevations endure in public views from [address]. As such, the attractive historic streetscape that forms this part of the CA is not materially harmed and its character and appearance is preserved.

Drawing the above together, the roof lantern has a neutral effect on the character and appearance of the CA and therefore its significance is preserved. However, for the reasons I have set out, the roof lantern fails to preserve the listed building. Consequently, the expectations of s16(2) and s66(1) of the Act have not been met and the significance of this designated heritage asset is adversely harmed.

In finding harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, the Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) requires the magnitude of that harm to be articulated. Given the nature and extent of the development and works, I find the harm to be at the low end of ‘less than substantial’ but, nevertheless, this is of considerable importance and weight. Paragraph 215 of the Framework advises that this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, which includes, where appropriate, securing the asset’s optimum viable use.

It is likely that the construction and fitting of the roof lantern has generated economic benefits and social benefits have arisen through investment in the local housing stock. These are public benefits that, due to the extent of the development and works, attract only limited weight in favour of the appeals.

I acknowledge that the roof lantern provides light to the existing kitchen area and has thus improved the current living arrangements for the appellant, but this is ultimately a private benefit. Additionally, I am not convinced that securing this benefit could not be achieved in a more sympathetic and less harmful way to the significance of the designated heritage asset. Moreover, there is no substantive evidence before me which confirms that the optimum viable use of the building as a dwelling is dependent on the roof lantern as there is nothing to suggest that its ongoing residential use would cease in its absence.

In all of the above respects, clear and convincing justification has not been provided for the identified harm to the significance of the listed building. Overall, the weight I ascribe to the public benefits are not sufficient to outweigh the considerable importance and weight I attach to the harm I have found.

Accordingly, whilst the character and appearance of the CA is preserved, the [name] listed building known as [site address] West or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses, is not preserved and its significance is harmed.

Given the above, I conclude that the condition remains both reasonable and necessary. To vary the condition to include the roof lantern would conflict with the statutory presumptions set out in the Act. It would also conflict with Policy BN5 of the [name] Local Plan (Part 1), adopted December 2014 and Policies SS2 and HE5 of the [name] 2 Local Plan 2011-2029, adopted July 2020. Together, these policies, amongst other things, seek that the historic environment is conserved and enhanced and that development is of an appropriate scale, form, design and materials compatible with the character of the building. There would also be conflict with the provisions of the Framework which seek to conserve and enhance the historic environment.

In relation to Appeal A, information submitted with the appeal indicates [site address] is close to other [name] listed buildings, namely, the adjacent stone wall2, [address] School3 and No 504. Mindful of the statutory duties set out in s66(1) of the Act, I have had special regard to preserving the settings of these listed buildings.

From the information before me and my own observations, I find the special interest and significance of the stone wall largely stems from its historic and architectural interests as a traditionally constructed high stone enclosure of the grounds of a former [address]. The special interest and significance of [address] School is mainly derived from its historic and architectural interests as an Elizabethan-style manor built for the 3rd Earl of Ellesmere. Its age, surviving traditional fabric and fine architectural detailing together with its group value with the surrounding stone wall and its focal point to the local community as part of the local scene are factors that make a positive contribution to its special interest.

No 50 is attached to and noted in the list entry for its group value with the appeal property. It is of squared rubble construction and includes 6 small but decorative dormers and a first-floor oriel canted bay window on the front elevation over a carriageway. Insofar as relevant to the appeal and from the evidence, these 2 National Heritage List for England, list entry name: [name], [address] ([address] School). List entry number: 1294031 3 National Heritage List for England, list entry name: [address] ([address] School). List entry number: 1371784 4 National Heritage List for England, list entry name:.48 and 50, [address]. List entry number: 1371785 factors contribute to its special interest and significance. The public routes and verdant spaces, both public and private, that are in proximity to these designated heritage assets, provide the space to experience them and appreciate their special interest.

Given the scale and location of the roof lantern in relation to these designated heritage assets, I find that the settings of these assets are preserved and their significance is not harmed. This meets the statutory presumption set out in section 66(1) of the Act and the provisions in the Framework regarding the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. I also note that the Council did not consider any effects in these regards sufficiently harmful to justify a reason for refusal on this basis.

Appeal A: The development conflicts with the development plan and the material considerations do not indicate that the appeal should be decided other than in accordance with it. Therefore, for the reasons given, I conclude that Appeal A is dismissed.

Appeal B: For the reasons given and having regard to all matters raised, I conclude that Appeal B is dismissed.