Removal of existing external door and sidelight and blocking up of existing aperture and insertion of new patio doors
📊
See the success rate & inspector analytics
Free to view — just create an account, no payment needed.
Sign Up FreeTechnical Issues Heatmap
Heritage & Conservation
Policy Weight
Rural Impact
Inspector’s Reasoning
Appeal Decision
Site visit made on 7 September 2023
by A Price BSc MA MRTPI
an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State
Decision date: 26th October 2023
Appeal Ref: APP/L2250/D/22/3292030
1 Bargrove Farm, Bargrove, Newington CT18 8BH
• 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 Mr Capell against the decision of Folkestone and Hythe District
Council.
• The application Ref 21/1359/FH, dated 23 June 2021, was refused by notice dated 16
November 2021.
• The development proposed is the removal of existing external door and sidelight and
blocking up of existing aperture and insertion of new patio doors.
Decision
1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the removal of
existing external door and sidelight and blocking up of existing aperture and
insertion of new patio doors at 1 Bargrove Farm, Bargrove, Newington CT18
8BH in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 21/1359/FH, dated 23
June 2021, subject to the conditions appended to this decision.
Preliminary Matters
2. The status of the building subject to this appeal (the former barn) was unclear
in the evidence provided. However, both parties were given the opportunity to
provide comment and, having regard to Section 1(5) of the Planning (Listed
Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act), the parties agree that
the barn is curtilage listed in respect of Bargrove Farmhouse, a Grade II listed
building. I have therefore determined the appeal on this basis.
3. As such, in accordance with Section 66(1) of the Act, I have paid special regard
to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of
special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
Main Issue
4. The main issue is whether the proposal would preserve the Grade II listed
building, Bargrove Farmhouse, or its setting.
Reasons
Special interest and significance
5. Bargrove Farmhouse is positioned to the south of the appeal property. It is a
Grade II listed building1, dating from the late eighteenth century and is finished
in stone with red brick detailing and a plain tile roof.
1 List Entry Number: 1061081
Appeal Decision APP/L2250/D/22/3292030
2
6. Based on the evidence before me, the special interest and significance of the
listed building is largely derived from its architectural and historic interest.
Important contributors in these regards, which are pertinent to the appeal, are
its illustration as a vernacular farmstead, which includes the appeal property
and its immediate setting.
7. The listed building derives further significance from the continued legibility of
the Farmhouse as the principal structure of a former farmstead, with an
historic and functional relationship with the appeal property, part of the
adjacent former barn complex.
8. Given the former barn’s curtilage listed status, its conservation is afforded the
same great weight as the Farmhouse. However, the evidence before me,
together with my observations on site, suggest that several significant changes
have occurred to the appeal building over time. This includes its conversion for
residential use and many associated physical interventions. In particular,
interventions have included the insertion of multiple domestic window and door
openings together with domestic landscaping. These factors have degraded the
integrity and heritage merit of the barn somewhat as part of the listed building
and have resulted in the loss of its historic agricultural character.
9. The closely associated grounds of the Farmhouse, including the adjacent barns,
and gardens, form the immediate setting of the heritage asset. It is from here
that the asset is best appreciated. This immediate setting contributes to the
asset’s special interest and significance. However, several interventions have
occurred, including the construction of the adjacent large car park, finished in
modern and incongruous urban materials, which have, to some extent,
degraded the integrity and heritage merit of this immediate setting.
10. The surrounding open fields form the wider setting of the listed Farmhouse.
Notwithstanding that this has been compromised to some extent through the
development of transportation infrastructure and sports uses, its historic
agricultural character nonetheless remains discernible. The wider setting allows
an appreciation of the historic functional and physical relationship between the
listed building and surrounding land. This wider setting contributes positively to
the special interest and significance of the listed building.
Appeal proposal and effects
11. The proposed development includes the removal and blocking up of an existing
door and window, and the insertion of replacement patio doors within the same
elevation, albeit in a different position.
12. The ground floor of the building is currently in use as a residential unit. The
modifications that have taken place on this floor previously are considerable.
However, there remains some evidence of historic fabric, namely the stone
walls, having been retained. Nevertheless, the existing window and door
insertion appears to be a modern intervention, which no longer reflects the
building’s original appearance or function as an agricultural building.
13. The proposed works would result in the loss of a modern window and door
insertion and some historic fabric (in particular, stone to the external walls).
However, the amount of historic fabric lost as part of the works would be
minimal. I also note the appellant’s reference to the re-use of existing
materials, where possible, including the use of matching bricks to form the
Appeal Decision APP/L2250/D/22/3292030
3
quoins surrounding the door. From that perspective, the development would
not have any tangible effect on the attributes that underlie the special interest
and significance of the building. Moreover, I am satisfied that a suitably worded
condition would be appropriate to control the making good of the area of wall
to be blocked up.
14. The relatively modest nature and discreet location of the proposed works are
such that they would not affect the ability to appreciate the principal listed
Farmhouse, or its immediate or wider settings, that contribute to its
significance. These settings would remain undisturbed by the proposed
scheme.
15. Overall, I conclude that the proposed development would preserve the Grade II
listed building, Bargrove Farmhouse, and its setting. Consequently, it would not
harm the significance of this designated heritage asset. In doing so, it would
satisfy the requirements of Section 66(1) of the Act. The proposal would also
accord with the relevant provisions of Policies HB1, HB8 and HE1 of the
Folkestone and Hythe District Places and Policies Local Plan (2020), which in
summary seek to protect heritage assets and their settings. This is in a similar
vein to the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) insofar as the
protection of heritage assets is concerned.
16. In finding no harmful effects to the special interest and significance of the
designated heritage asset, it is not incumbent on me to consider any public
benefits that would flow from the proposal.
Other Matters
17. The site lies within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and
Special Landscape Area. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) are
designated for the purposes of conserving and enhancing natural beauty.
Although there is no dispute between the main parties in this respect, Section
85(1) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (as amended) places a
duty upon me to have regard to these purposes in this decision. Supporting
this objective, the Framework sets out how great weight should be given to
conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in AONBs. Although the
appeal site contributes to the rural character of the surrounding area it makes
only a limited contribution to the landscape character of the AONB. By reason
of the nature of the proposed development, together with its discreet location,
it would have a neutral effect on landscape character.
18. The site is also located within an area of archaeological potential. There is no
dispute between the appellant and Council in this respect and there is no
reason for me to disagree with those findings. By reason of the nature of the
works to the façade of the appeal building, no conditions relating to
archaeology are considered necessary.
Conditions
19. In addition to the standard time limit condition and a condition relating to the
approved drawings, for certainty, a further condition is imposed requesting
details and samples of the external materials to be used in the development.
This is necessary to preserve the special interest of the listed building.
Appeal Decision APP/L2250/D/22/3292030
4
20. The Council has suggested a condition relating to matching materials. However,
I consider the wording of the condition below in respect of materials to
satisfactorily deal with this matter.
21. In imposing conditions, I have had regard to the tests within the Framework,
the Planning Practice Guidance, and relevant statute.
Conclusion
22. The proposed development would comply with the development plan. There are
no material considerations that indicate that the decision should be made other
than in accordance with the development plan. Therefore, for the reasons
given, I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
A Price
INSPECTOR
Appeal Decision APP/L2250/D/22/3292030
5
SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS
1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years
from the date of this decision.
2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance
with the following approved plans: 21/1209 – 01 Site Location Map,
21/1209 – 02 Site Block Plan, 21/1209 – 04 Proposed Floor Plan and
Elevation, 21/1209 – 05 Joinery Details.
3) No development shall commence until details and samples of the
materials (including mortar mix) to be used in the construction of the
external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
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.