Appeal 6006895

The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for change of use of land from agriculture to residential (Use Class C3), the demolition of existing barns (one of which is retrospective) and the erection of a residential dwelling, a detached car port and store, and a bin store, and associated works at [site address] , [address] Southeast To The Green, Swallowcliffe, Wiltshire [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2025/03953, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

An application for costs was made by [name] and [name] against Wiltshire Council. This application is the subject of a separate decision.

This appeal relates to development that has commenced by way of the demolition of a barn. The application is therefore partially retrospective, and I have considered the submission accordingly.

The main issue is whether the site is a suitable location for the proposal, having regard to the local development strategy, and its effect on the character and appearance of the area including the Swallowcliffe Conservation Area (CA) and [name] and West Wiltshire Downs National Landscape (NL).

Swallowcliffe is identified as a small village within the [name] 2015 (WCS). WCS Core Policy 2 outlines the strategy for the delivery of development in a sustainable manner. Specifically in relation to small villages, WCS Core Policy 2 outlines that development will be limited to infill within the existing built area and will be supported where it seeks to meet, among other things, the housing needs of settlements, provided that specific criteria are met. These include that the development respects the existing character and form of the settlement; does not elongate the village or impose development in sensitive landscape areas; and does not consolidate existing sporadic loose knit areas of development related to the settlement.

‘Infill’ is defined within the WCS as ‘the filling of a small gap within the village that is only large enough for not more than a few dwellings, generally only one dwelling’. The appeal site is seen within the context of surrounding built form, and although set back from the highway, nearby dwellings. I observed that it is visually seen to be part of, and within the village of Swallowcliffe. Although whilst currently there is minimal gap in built form due to the site accommodating a Dutch barn, part of the proposal is its demolition which would result in a small gap within the village. The proposed erection of a dwelling, largely surrounded by built form would not elongate the village, and in my view, accord with the WCS definition of infill.

Swallowcliffe features a mix of building forms including dwellings of various ages, as well as former barns and utilitarian buildings. Built form in the area is scattered with no constant building line, and this spatial relationship, combined with adjacent countryside and areas of garden and roadside planting result in a pleasant semi-rural verdant character. This character is re-enforced by the predominant use of traditional materials and design features within the built environment, such as stone, red brick and timber faced elevations and a mix of slate, red tile and thatch pitch roofs.

The appeal site is also within the CA. From my observations I find its special qualities, and thus significance in part, derives from its traditional period buildings, pattern of development and links to the surrounding countryside.

The proposed dwelling would replace a large Dutch barn (barn 10), which by way of its roofing material, massing and overall form appears somewhat incongruous within the CA. Design elements of the proposal reflect that of traditional vernacular styled barns, with the elevation details articulated to successfully break up the bulk and massing of the dwelling and add appropriate architectural interest. Whilst there are some contemporary design details, such as elements of glazing, the overall use of a traditional materials palette reflective of the local vernacular in combination with appropriate boundary treatments, and outbuildings of suitable scale and appearance would further assimilate the proposal into the area.

Moreover, although it is put to me by interested parties that the proposal would represent ‘backland’ development, the positioning and spatial relationship of the proposal to surrounding existing dwellings and buildings, as well as overall size would not appear out of place or otherwise unexpected given the surrounding scattered pattern and scale of built form. The proposal would not be uncharacteristic of the area, and in combination with the removal of barn 10 would not harm the significance of the CA but have a minor positive effect on the character and appearance of the CA, and wider area.

Although within the NL, the proposal would be seen in conjunction with existing development and as part of the urban form of the settlement, as opposed to part of the surrounding countryside landscape. Moreover, given I have found the proposal would be infill development within the built form of the village, and the design and appearance would assimilate well with surrounding built form, the proposal would not result in any harm to, and would conserve the landscape and scenic beauty of the NL and accord with the provisions of the Cranborne Chase National Landscape Partnership Plan 2025-2030.

In terms of the dark sky initiative, the proposal does not incorporate rooflights and as such would minimise upwards light spill. Furthermore, even if the proposal results in any additional light spill, this would be seen within the context of lighting within an existing settlement, and would not be out of context, or create notable amounts of light pollution within the Dark Sky Reserve. Moreover, a planning condition can be imposed to ensure external lighting is of a design and type which minimises sky glow, glare and light trespass.

The Council have referred to a differing planning application that was refused (PL/2025/02476), as it was considered not to constitute ‘infill’ development. Nevertheless, full details of that application are not before me and I have limited information as to the context of that proposal, or any similarities. Moreover, the current appeal proposal relates to a differing location and has its own circumstances, thus I will determine it on its own merits.

In conclusion, the proposal would therefore be in a suitable location, having regard to the local development strategy, and its effect on the character and appearance of the area including the CA and NL. It would accord with WCS Core Policy 2, Core Policy 51, Core Policy 57 and Core Policy 58. As well as that previously outlined, these policies seek, amongst other things, to protect, conserve and where possible enhance landscape character, ensure high quality design and place shaping, and conserve the historic environment.

[name] is a [name] listed building. The significance of [name] derives in part from its historic, architectural and artistic values as an example of a period farmhouse. The immediately surrounding land allows an appreciation of its values and convey the functions between the farmhouse and its surroundings and contributes to the historic value and setting of the listed building.

Although near the listed building, the appeal site forms only a part of its wider setting and incorporates more modern utilitarian buildings and associated surrounding land which does not positively contribute to the setting and significance of the listed building. The traditional appearance of the proposal similar to that of converted traditional farm buildings, its scale, and proposed traditional materials would not detract from, and have a neutral effect on the significance of the heritage asset, including its setting.

The removal of a barn which forms part of the proposal has already taken place. Nevertheless, the Council’s Conservation Officer considered that given the date of its construction it was not a curtilage listed building and was of limited heritage interest. Given the substantive evidence before me, I see no reason to disagree.

Various other matters in addition to the main issue above have been raised by interested parties. The proposal would utilise an existing access and incorporates sufficient space for offroad parking and turning. Although the use of the highway by pedestrians and emergency vehicles has been brought to my attention, I observed the highway to be lightly trafficked. Even noting the use of the access for the adjacent dwelling and annexe, given the relatively low number of additional movements likely to be associated with this proposal, in combination with planning conditions to ensure parking, turning, visibility and appropriate surfacing is provided, the proposal would not result in harm to highway safety.

Ecological assessments have been carried out at the appeal site and a Biodiversity Metric Assessment submitted. Subject to the imposition of suitable planning conditions, the substantive evidence indicates that the proposal would mitigate for any harm to protected species and achieve sufficient biodiversity net gain and I note the Council’s ecologist is of a similar view.

In terms of neighbouring occupiers living conditions, given separation distances and spatial relationships with the surrounding dwellings (including [address]) and associated gardens, the proposal, whilst affording some views of garden areas particularly from first floor windows, would not result in significant levels of overlooking. Furthermore, planning conditions can be imposed to limit hours of working during construction and ensure noise outputs from an Air Source Heat Pump would not be at a level to cause disturbance.

The majority of the appeal site falls within flood zone 1, with a part within flood zone 2/3. The appellant’s [name] Assessment1(FRA) outlines that the proposed car port would be within flood zone 1, as opposed to flood zone 2/3. [name] acknowledge interested parties’ comments and photographs in relation to flooding events in the area, the FRA demonstrates that the proposal is unlikely to place additional persons at risk of flooding or to increase flood risk elsewhere through the loss of floodplain storage, impedance of flood flows or increase in surface water run-off.

The proposal would utilise a package treatment plant and I acknowledge interested parties’ comments including proximity to nearby watercourses and ponds and ability to discharge into water courses. However, land ownership is a civil matter that falls outside of the planning regime. I have no substantive evidence that the principle of a drainage strategy would be unworkable and a planning condition could be imposed to ensure a workable and appropriate detailed drainage scheme comes forward. Moreover, compliance with building regulations or license applications in relation to discharge are outside of the planning regime and would be considered under differing legislatives regimes.

Interested parties have also stated that inaccurate information has been provided. However no substantive evidence is before me to lead me to believe that reports or information provided as part of the application are in any way inaccurate.

Whilst interested parties also state that there is no need for additional housing within Swallowcliffe, the Council have confirmed that they can only demonstrate a 2.42 years housing land supply. Therefore, it is clear that there is a significant housing need in the wider area. In terms of precedent, this appeal has been dealt with on its own merits and has been found to be acceptable for the reasons given above. There is no clear reason why this appeal decision would set a precedent for the area, as each proposal must be assessed on its own merits and the particular circumstances and context of the site. 1 FPS environmental March 2025

The appeal site is within the catchment of the River Avon Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and consultation zone for [name] and Barbastelle bats associated with the [name]. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (Habitats Regulations) require that permission may only be granted after having ascertained that the development will not affect the integrity of the SACs.

The Annex I qualifying features for the [name] are watercourses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation’. [name] species present include internationally important populations of Desmoulin’s whorl snail, sea lamprey, brook lamprey, Atlantic salmon and bullhead.

Elevated levels of phosphorus are preventing the conservation objectives for the [name] from being achieved and causing the river to be in unfavourable condition. Development within the river catchment, including the proposed dwelling at the site, in combination with other development, have the potential to contribute to elevated phosphorus through foul water discharge from sewage treatment works and package treatment plants .

The appellant’s Nutrient Neutrality Assessment and Mitigation Strategy2, outlines that the proposal seeks to meet nutrient neutrality by upgrading the existing septic tank within the appeal site which currently serves [name] with a replacement [name] (Graf One2clean) (PTP).

The submitted phosphorous nutrient calculations demonstrates that the proposed nutrient burden with the additional overnight accommodation would be less than the existing burdens, with the septic tank upgrade providing a reduction of 0.82kgP/yr emissions which is sufficient to balance the proposed dwelling’s 0.27kgP/yr emissions. The mitigation approach achieves nutrient neutrality and provides a betterment in terms of reducing the existing phosphorus load impact on the SAC. Adherence to the on-site mitigation strategy can be secured via planning

[name] qualifying features for The Chilmark Quarries Bats SAC are Greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum, Barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus, and Bechstein’s bat Myotis bechsteinii. [name] species include Lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros. Ecological assessments including an emergence survey have been undertaken which indicate that the buildings subject to the proposal do not support confirmed bat roosts, although roosts, feeding activity and exploratory use by bats were observed in the area. It can therefore be assumed that the site hosts foraging and commuting potential for bats associated with the [name].

As a result, there is the potential for likely significant effects on qualifying bats from noise and disturbance during construction and as a result of lighting during construction and occupation. Potential adverse effects of the proposal are capable of being mitigated by mitigation and enhancement measures outlined within the Ecological Assessment3 and secured by planning condition. 2 [name] & Environmental Servies ref: 01.191.002.02_ [site address] _NNAMS 3 07 April 2025. [name] and Environmental Services. [name]. 0808. Issue. 01

Following appropriate assessment under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, I am satisfied that adverse effects on the integrity of the SACs will be avoided. I also note that, as measures proposed to mitigate for all identified adverse effects that could potentially occur as a result of the proposal are appropriately secured, Natural England has no objection to the proposal.

The Council have also drawn my attention to two other appeal decisions4 where the Inspectors afforded ‘limited’ weight to a proposal against a housing land supply shortfall. However, as in this case I have found that the proposal accords with the development plan, the circumstance of the Inspectors determinations materially differ from the case before me.

The Council has provided a list of suggested conditions in the event of the appeal being allowed, which I have assessed and, where necessary, amended wording with regard to the advice provided in the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG).

As the proposal has commenced, a standard commencement condition is not required. However, a condition outlining the approved plans is necessary in the interests of certainty.

A number of conditions requiring information prior to any further works taking place are required. A detailed drainage strategy is necessary to prevent an increased risk of flooding and minimise risk of pollution of surface water.

A Construction Environmental Management Plan is necessary and required prior to further works to ensure adequate protection and mitigation for ecological receptors prior to and during construction and safeguard the health and living conditions of local residents and in the interests of biodiversity. The condition suggested by the Council includes detailed information requirements. However, I have omitted these so that the parties can agree the precise requirements based upon relevant guidance and site circumstances at the time that the details are agreed.

A condition is also necessary to ensure that an appropriate hard and soft landscaping scheme is provided and implemented in the interests of the character and appearance of the area.

A condition is necessary to ensure a written programme of archaeological investigation is submitted and carried out in order to record and advance understanding of the significance of any heritage assets to be lost in a manner proportionate to their importance.

A condition to agree details of external materials to be used is necessary in the interests of the character and appearance of the CA, however I have removed reference to roof lights as these do not form part of the proposal. A further condition is also necessary to ensure that works are carried out in accordance with the [name] and Mitigation Assessment in the interests of the protection of trees and character and appearance of the area. 4 APP/Y/3940/W/25/3367873 & APP/Y3940/W/23/3314731

To ensure nutrient neutrality so as to protect the [name], conditions are necessary to secure the installation and ongoing maintenance of the package treatment plant and restrict future water usage.

In the interests of biodiversity and the [name], a separate condition is necessary to secure the implementation of the recommendations and requirements set out in the submitted Ecological Assessment.

As set out in the PPG, the statutory framework for biodiversity net gain requires a Biodiversity Gain Plan to be submitted and approved to discharge the mandatory biodiversity gain condition prior to the commencement of development. A condition to require compliance with the submitted details in that regard is therefore not necessary. A further condition is necessary to ensure appropriate external lighting is installed in the interests of safeguarding protected species and protecting the dark skies initiative.

A condition is also necessary to agree details of the air source heat pump, and limit times of construction in order to safeguard the living conditions of the occupiers of neighbouring properties. In the interests of highway safety, conditions are necessary to ensure appropriate surfacing and position of gates at the access, provision of visibility splays and surface water drainage to prevent water entering the highway, and require the provision and retention of parking spaces and turning area to serve the development.

Finally, a condition is necessary in relation to unexpected contamination in the interests of the health and safety of construction workers, and future and neighbouring occupiers.

A condition is suggested by the Council which would restrict permitted development rights in the interests of the ‘amenity’ of the area and the NL. The PPG5 is clear that blanket removal of freedoms to carry out small scale domestic and non-domestic alterations that would otherwise not require an application for planning permission are unlikely to meet the tests of reasonableness and necessity.

While there are specific exceptions for some classes where permitted development rights do not apply, the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 does not withdraw all permitted development rights for land within a Conservation Area or National Landscape but rather requires planning permission to be sought for specific development. It can therefore be surmised that the development within these types of areas for which permitted development rights remain intact is regarded by the Government as being no different in terms of the application of permitted development rights to land outside of it. No compelling reasons have been brought to my attention as to why permitted development rights should be withdrawn in this case, as such I have not imposed the condition. 5 Paragraph: 017 [name]: 21a-[phone]

For the above reasons the proposal would accord with the development plan, when read as a whole. Material considerations do not indicate a decision should be taken other than in accordance with the development plan. I therefore conclude the appeal should be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: NH50 [name]; NH54 [name]; NH55 [name]; NH56 [name]; ND57 [name]; NH58 [name]; NH59 [name]; NH63 [name]; NH64; 24197-TEC- V2-[name] 001_P2.

No further development shall take place until a detailed drainage strategy is submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority which demonstrates that surface water flood risk including runoff from the proposed development and shall include the following: i. Evidence that discharge rates are restricted in line with Wiltshire Council’s betterment policy; ii. Evidence that the proposed attenuation is able to contain both flood water and required attenuation combined up to and including volumes arising from the 100 year + event and evidence that there is sufficient freeboard (300mm minimum) above the critical 1 in 100yr + climate change storm event; iii. Overland exceedance routes are to be shown on the drainage plan for flows in excess of the 1 in 100 year plus climate change (40%) rainfall event; iv. Additional details with respect to the gravelled areas to include details on the material specification, the level of compaction required and; cross sections through the proposed gravelled area. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

No further development shall take place, including demolition, ground works/excavation, site clearance, vegetation clearance and boundary treatment works, until a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The Plan shall provide details of the avoidance, mitigation and protective measures to be implemented before and during the construction phase Development shall be carried out in strict accordance with the approved CEMP.

Notwithstanding the submitted details, no further development shall take place until a scheme of hard and soft landscaping has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority, the details of which shall include: i. location and current canopy spread of all existing trees and hedgerows on the land; ii. full details of any to be retained, together with measures for their protection in the course of development; iii. a detailed planting specification showing all plant species, supply and planting sizes and planting densities; iv. means of enclosure to include details of fencing and gates; v. all hard and soft surfacing materials; vi. minor artefacts and structures to include refuse storage units. All soft landscaping comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the dwelling or the completion of the development whichever is the sooner; All shrubs, trees and hedge planting shall be maintained free from weeds and shall be protected from damage by vermin and stock. Any trees, hedgerow or plants which, within a period of five years, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species. All hard landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details prior to the occupation the development.

No further development, other than demolition to ground level, shall take place within the area indicated by the red line boundary on [name]. NH50 [name], until: a) A written programme of archaeological investigation, which should include on-site work and off-site work including the analysis, publishing and archiving of the results, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority; and b) The approved programme of archaeological work has been carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Notwithstanding approved drawing [name]: NH64, no development above slab level shall take place until details of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority: i. Details of the stone for the block openings that should match the existing walling; ii. Details for the windows and doors; iii. Details of a metre built stone panel for the new dwellinghouse and stone wall; iv. Details of the glazing that shall be recessed behind the timber/clad walls. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved detail.

The development hereby approved shall be carried out in strict accordance with the submitted [name] and Mitigation Assessment dated March 2025 undertaken by [name].

Prior to the development hereby approved first being occupied, the existing septic tank shall be removed and the proposed package treatment plant (PTP) shall be installed, maintained and operated in accordance with approved drawing [name]: NH54 [name] and the Nutrient Neutrality Assessment and [name] undertaken by [name] and Environmental Services Dated 30.04.25. Any subsequent replacements shall have an equivalent or improved performance specification. The package treatment plant and drainage field shall be installed, connected and available for use before the development is occupied and they shall be maintained and operated thereafter for the lifetime of the development.

The residential development hereby approved shall be designed to ensure it does not exceed 120 litres per person per day water consumption levels (which includes external water usage).

The development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations and requirements set out in section 5 of the Ecological Assessment undertaken by [name] and Environmental Services dated 07.04.25 and the measures therein retained as such in perpetuity.

Any external lighting that is installed across the site shall be designed and implemented to minimise sky glow, glare and light trespass. It shall be designed in a downward facing position at all times and shall meet the criteria for Environmental Zone E0 as defined by the Institute of [name] ‘Guidance Notes for the Reduction of [name] 2012. Any external lighting installed at the site shall be retained and maintained as such thereafter for the lifetime of the development.

Prior to the installation of the Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP) as shown on approved plan [name]: NH54 [name], full details of the proposed unit including the model, noise output levels (including any mitigation measures) and confirmation of compliance with the [name] (MCS) or equivalent shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The ASHP shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and retained as such thereafter.

No construction or demolition work shall take place on Sundays or Public Holidays or outside of the hours of 08:00 – 18:00 Monday to Friday and 08:00 to 13:00 on Saturdays.

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until any alteration to the surface of the vehicle access is that of a consolidated material (not loose stone or gravel) for the first 4.5m. Any gates shall be set back 4.5m from the edge of the carriageway, such gates to open inwards only. The access shall be maintained as such thereafter.

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the vegetation across the site frontage within the highway verge has been cleared of any obstruction to visibility at and above a height of 900mm above the nearside carriageway level and the [name] have been installed either side of the vehicle access on the highway verge, and maintained as such thereafter.

Notwithstanding the submitted details, the proposed development shall not be occupied until means/works have been implemented to avoid private water from entering the highway and retained as such thereafter.

The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the turning area and parking spaces have been completed in accordance with the details shown on the approved plans. The areas shall always be maintained for the purposes thereafter and maintained free from the storage of materials.

In the event that contamination is encountered at any time when carrying out the approved development, the local planning authority must be advised of the steps that will be taken by an appropriate contractor; to deal with contamination and provide a written remedial statement to be followed be a written verification report that confirms what works that have been undertaken to render the development suitable for use. . **** End of Conditions ****