Single storey and two storey extensions to form chalet bungalow
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Heritage & Conservation
Character & Appearance
Policy Weight
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 24 May 2017
by Tom Gilbert-Wooldridge BA (Hons) MTP MRTPI IHBC
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
Decision date: 23rd June 2017
Appeal Ref: APP/P0240/D/17/3174342
The Stables, College Farm, Barton Road, Pulloxhill MK45 5HP
The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
against a refusal to grant planning permission.
The appeal is made by Dr Kruszewska against the decision of Central Bedfordshire
Council.
The application Ref CB/16/05642/FULL, dated 5 December 2016, was refused by notice
dated 31 January 2017.
The development proposed is single storey and two storey extensions to form chalet
bungalow.
Decision
1. The appeal is dismissed.
Main Issue
2. The main issue is the effect of the proposed development on the character and
appearance of the host building and Pulloxhill Conservation Area and the
setting of the listed College Farm.
Reasons
3. Pulloxhill Conservation Area contains the historic core of the village of Pulloxhill
and a number of buildings of varying ages, sizes and architectural styles. Its
character and appearance and its significance derives from the survival of
historic buildings including those associated with the village’s agricultural past.
The Grade II listed College Farm adjacent to the appeal site is a prominent two
storey farmhouse at the junction of the High Street with Barton Road and
Flitton Road. An access track between College Farm and the appeal site leads
to open countryside, forming part of the agricultural and rural setting of this
listed building and contributing to its significance.
4. The appeal building known as The Stables is one of a number of buildings
associated with College Farm that have been converted to residential use and
appear to be in separate ownership. A number of modern alterations have
taken place to The Stables giving it a more domestic character and
appearance. There has also been recent modern development including a
garage between The Stables and College Farm and a large house to the east of
College Farm. Nevertheless, when viewed from the access track and the
junction between the High Street and Barton and Flitton Roads, the original
farmyard layout that contains The Stables is clear. The Stables and adjoining
buildings are single storey and appear subservient to College Farm as former
agricultural barns. These characteristics are only partly diminished by the
modern alterations to The Stables and recent modern development. There
Appeal Decision APP/P0240/D/17/3174342
2
remains a visual as well as an historical relationship between The Stables and
College Farm and the conservation area. Thus, The Stables makes a positive
contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area and the
setting of College Farm and the significance of both heritage assets.
5. Given the mix of architectural styles and building sizes within the conservation
area, the proposed development would not look out of place in terms of its
design and scale. However, the central section of the building would increase
considerably in footprint and height and would significantly alter the character
and appearance of the host building. It would no longer be a subservient
building within a farmyard setting when viewed from the access track and road
junction next to College Farm. As a result, there would be a negative effect on
the character and appearance of the host building and Pulloxhill Conservation
Area as well as the setting of College Farm. The significance of the two
heritage assets would also be harmed.
6. The harm to the significance of the conservation area would be less than
substantial as the proposed development would not be very visible further
along the High Street away from the access track and road junction. Moreover,
the composition of historic buildings within the conservation area would largely
survive. Similarly, the harm to the significance of the listed building would be
less than substantial as the development would only partly erode the setting of
College Farm. Nevertheless, the harm to both heritage assets would still be of
a moderate scale due to the extent of changes to The Stables and its impact on
the farmyard setting.
7. In line with paragraph 134 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF),
such harm needs to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal.
The appellant highlights the structural condition of The Stables, which evidently
needs to be addressed. However, it has not been demonstrated that the
proposed development is the only way in which this could be achieved. I note
the desire to improve the amount of living space for occupiers of The Stables,
but this does not represent a public benefit. The development would make a
more efficient use of land, but only to a limited extent as The Stables would
remain a single dwelling. Thus, the public benefits are insufficient to outweigh
the harm to the significance of the conservation area and listed building.
8. In conclusion, the proposed development would have a negative effect on the
host building and Pulloxhill Conservation Area and the setting of College Farm.
Therefore, it would not accord with Policies CS14, CS15, DM3 and DM13 of the
Central Bedfordshire (North) Core Strategy and Development Management
Policies 2009. These policies seek high quality development appropriate in
scale and design to their setting that protects, conserves and enhances listed
buildings and conservation areas. It would also conflict with the NPPF in terms
of not providing good design or sustaining the significance of heritage assets.
Conclusion
9. For the above reasons, and having had regard to all other matters raised, I
conclude that the appeal should be dismissed.
Tom Gilbert-Wooldridge
INSPECTOR
Expert Representation
Don't leave your appeal to chance.
Inspectors are inconsistent. We build a technical defense using precedents from our 182,000+ case archive.
No win, no fee Householder representation — you only pay if you win.