Appeal 6004191

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the construction of a dwelling on land off [name], Stainland, Halifax [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 24/00341/FUL, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

The Council has confirmed that the decision to refuse planning permission was based on amended plans received during the course of the application. For the avoidance of doubt, I have determined the appeal on the basis of those amended plans.

The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character or appearance of the Stainland Conservation Area (SCA), and on the setting of the nearby listed building, known as the former Bull and [address].

The appeal site is an elevated parcel of open grassland set above the adjoining road, with a high dry‐stone wall defining much of the frontage. It is surrounded on its remaining boundaries by residential properties, with a corresponding stone wall and garden located opposite, such that it nestles into the street scene. The former Bull and [address] lies at a distance to the north-east on the opposite side of [name].

The Council’s published brief appraisal for the SCA explains the character as being essentially linear in layout with all principal buildings facing the main road to form a central spine. It adds that there is not generally a building line and that the road narrows to ‘pinch points’ where buildings are closer with occasional dramatic glimpses across the open countryside. The architecture of the village is also recognised as representing all phases of its history. I consider the significance of the SCA to therefore be derived from its hilltop position, vernacular style and simple form of local stone buildings laid in a traditional arrangement responding to the topography of the area, historic transport routes and the growth of the wool and textile industries in neighbouring valleys.

The parties dispute both the historic use of the land and the significance of stone posts previously situated on the land. On the evidence before me, I cannot be certain that the land’s historic use was demonstrably connected to the wider wool and textile industry. Furthermore, the stone posts did not benefit from any statutory protections, and they have since been removed. Notwithstanding this, the current site conditions make a neutral contribution to the significance of the conservation area.

The proposal is for a 4-bedroom dwelling positioned close to the adjacent road with associated parking, highway access and outdoor amenity space. The site levels would be substantially lowered to align with the adjacent road and neighbouring dwellings on either side. The scale, design and siting of the proposed dwelling would reflect the established character of the street, incorporating traditional detailing, window fenestration and a stepped ridge to reduce the visual mass, together with a modest set-back from the road. While the northern elevation would present a blank wall towards [name], this would reflect the character of neighbouring development and would therefore sit comfortably within the street scene. A lower and realigned dry-stone wall would extend across most of the frontage, with a driveway leading from the new vehicular access to side and rear parking. In these respects, it is clear that the design approach has been carefully considered.

Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the LBCA) requires special attention to be paid to preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of conservation areas. The proposal would result in the loss of existing open land and high dry-stone wall adjacent to the road, however, neither is identified as making a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the SCA. Moreover, while the site provides a limited degree of openness within the street scene, its land levels and surrounding built form mean that it does not afford dramatic views over the wider landscape.

I note that some parties regard the open land as a non‐designated heritage asset; however, the evidence before me does not support that conclusion. Rather, any heritage interest appears to primarily relate to the former stone posts on the site, thought to be tenter posts, and not to the land itself. As those features are no longer present on the land, they do not weigh in my assessment.

The overall siting, scale and design of the proposed dwelling reflect the prevailing character of the SCA, drawing from the modest traditional cottages set close to the road that define the village’s central spine. While the existing high dry‐stone wall would be lowered and re‐aligned to facilitate a visibility splay, this treatment would be consistent with other front boundary arrangements evident nearby. Therefore, while being a new construction, the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the SCA.

As outlined above, the former Bull and [address] which is a grade II listed building lies near to the appeal site. I have therefore had special regard to section 66(1) of the LBCA. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) is clear that the setting of a heritage asset ‘is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve’.

According to the statutory list description the building was constructed during the 18th century, with early 19th century additions, from hammer-dressed stone, stone slate roof with coped gables and kneelers. Whilst the former public house has been latterly converted into residential accommodation, it is a building which retains historic architectural elements and local materials typical of this period. It is these factors along with its location on a historic transport route and within a village community which contribute to its historic and architectural significance.

The appeal site is a grassed parcel of land located on the opposite side of the road some distance to the south-west. Although views towards the listed building on the approach from the north include both the former public house and the appeal site, there is no evidence before me that the two sites were ever functionally or historically related. The appeal site is therefore perceived as a gap between the traditional cottages alongside the road and as such adds little to the significance of the listed building as a heritage asset as set out above.

While the proposal would change the character and appearance of the site and would be visible within the context of the nearby listed building, I am unconvinced that the sensitively designed proposed development would harm the setting of the listed building.

For the above reasons, I find that the proposed development would not harm the character or appearance of the SCA, or the setting of the nearby listed building. Accordingly, it would preserve the character and appearance of the SCA and the setting of the nearby listed building such that it would accord with the requirements of the LBCA. It would not therefore conflict with Policies HE1, BT1 and HS1 of the Calderdale Local Plan 2018/19 – 2032/33 (March 2023) which, amongst other matters, together seek to ensure that development takes account of its local context, conserves or enhances heritage assets and does not harm those elements that contribute to their significance, including their settings.

The Council have not raised any concerns with regards highway safety or the living conditions of neighbouring residents, including the impact on privacy, daylight and sunlight. I have no strong reason to reach a different conclusion.

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 respects. 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.

In addition to the standard time condition [1], I have imposed a condition requiring that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans [2], in the interests of certainty. Details of the external materials [6], and for the windows and doors [7], are necessary to achieve a satisfactory appearance.

I have imposed several conditions which due to their nature require the submission of details prior to the commencement of development and these include archaeology [3], a construction management plan [4] and drainage [5]. The imposition of these conditions has been agreed by the appellant and are in the interests of the historic environment, living conditions and environmental management. It is necessary for these conditions to be pre commencement to ensure details are agreed before abortive works which may affect them are undertaken.

The requirement for the installation of bat and bird boxes [8] is necessary in the interests of biodiversity and local wildlife, however, the wording has been amended to take account of the documents submitted which already detail these elements.

In the interests of highway safety, conditions are necessary requiring the completion of the realigned front wall [9] and the provision of the proposed off-street parking [10]. A further requirement for the approval of the front wall materials is also necessary in the interests of appearance. In addition, a condition for the provision of a secure cycle store [11] is necessary to encourage sustainable travel.

The Council has suggested a condition which aims to secure the reinstatement of the stone posts on the land. However, this requirement is not relevant to the development or reasonable in all other respects. I therefore conclude that such a condition would not meet the relevant tests.

I have not imposed the Council’s suggested electric vehicle charging point condition because this provision is a requirement of Building Regulations and the condition is therefore unnecessary.

Due to the provisions of Schedule 7 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and as none of the statutory exemptions apply in this case, the development may not be begun unless a biodiversity gain plan has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority.

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

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 001B, 002C, 004C, 005B, 006D.

No development (including demolition) shall take place until a written scheme of archaeological investigation (WSI) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. For land that is included within the WSI, no development (including demolition) shall take place other than in accordance with the agreed WSI, which shall include the statement of significance and research objectives, and: (i) The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording and the nomination of a competent person(s) or organisation to undertake the agreed works; and (ii) The programme for post-investigation assessment and subsequent analysis, publication & dissemination and deposition of resulting material. This part of the condition shall not be discharged until these elements have been fulfilled in accordance with the programme set out in the WSI.

No development shall take place, including any demolition or ground works, until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The management plan shall include, but not be limited to: (i) construction traffic routes, including provision for access to the site; (ii) site entrance/exit for visitors/contractors/deliveries; (iii) siting of temporary containers; (iv) parking of vehicles for contractors, site operatives and visitors; (v) storage of materials and large/heavy vehicles/machinery on site; (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction; (vii) details of street sweeping/street cleansing/wheelwash facilities; (viii) details for the recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works; (ix) delivery, demolition and construction working hours. The approved Construction Management Plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction period for the development.

No drainage works shall begin until full details of the foul and/or surface water and/or sustainable systems of drainage if feasible and/or sub-soil drainage and external works for the development (taking into account exceedance flow, flood risk on and off site and including details of any balancing works, off-site works, existing systems to be re-used, works on or near watercourses and diversions) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The applicant should provide the local planning authority with a drawing showing ownership and maintenance liability of all drainage systems associated with this development. The details so approved shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and shall be retained thereafter.

Notwithstanding any details shown on the permitted plans, the facing and roofing of the development shall not begin until details of the proposed facing and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Before the development hereby permitted is first brought into use, the development shall be constructed in accordance with the details so approved and shall be so retained thereafter.

Before any windows and doors are installed, details of the materials, treatment, colour and finish of the windows and doors shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Prior to first occupation of the development hereby permitted the windows and doors shall then be installed in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained thereafter.

The bat roosting feature and the swift nesting feature shown on the Species Enhancement Plan, produced by JCA Limited, shall be installed prior to first occupation of the dwelling and shall be so retained thereafter.

The development shall not be occupied until the stone wall adjacent to the B6112 road has been realigned and reduced in height to no more than 900mm from the highway level, to provide a visibility splay to the new access of 33m measured 2.4m from the kerb. Details of the materials, jointing and coursing for the realigned front boundary wall shall first be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The front boundary wall shall be constructed in accordance with the details so approved and shall be so retained thereafter.

The dwelling shall not be occupied until the off-street parking facilities shown on the permitted plans for that dwelling have been provided, surfaced, drained and made available for the occupiers of that dwelling. These facilities shall thereafter be kept available at all times for the parking of vehicles.

The development shall not be occupied until details of a secure internal cycle store have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The store shall then be provided in accordance with the details so approved prior to the first occupation of the development and retained thereafter. End of Schedule