Demolition of existing outbuilding, single storey rear extension to existing dwelling and single storey tractor/car 3 bay open barn

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 16 September 2026 by G Bayliss BA (Hons) MA MA MRTPI IHBC an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 25 September 2026 Appeal A Ref: 6011362 15 High Street, Alconbury Weston, Cambridgeshire PE28 4JP • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Alistair Rush against the decision of Huntingdonshire District Council. • The application Ref is 25/02283/HHFUL. • The development proposed is the demolition of existing outbuilding, single storey rear extension to existing dwelling and single storey tractor/car 3 bay open barn. Appeal B Ref: 6010766 15 High Street, Alconbury Weston, Cambridgeshire PE28 4JP • The appeal is made under section 20 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant listed building consent. • The appeal is made by Mr Alistair Rush against the decision of Huntingdonshire District Council. • The application Ref is 25/02284/LBC. • The works proposed are the demolition of existing outbuilding, single storey rear extension to existing dwelling and single storey tractor/car 3 bay open barn. Decisions 1. Appeal A: The appeal is allowed, and planning permission is granted for the demolition of existing outbuilding, single storey rear extension to existing dwelling and single storey tractor/car 3 bay open barn at 15 High Street, Alconbury Weston, Cambridgeshire PE28 4JP, in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/02283/HHFUL, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule. 2. Appeal B: The appeal is allowed, and listed building consent is granted for the demolition of existing outbuilding, single storey rear extension to existing dwelling and single storey tractor/car 3 bay open barn at 15 High Street, Alconbury Weston, Cambridgeshire PE28 4JP, in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/02284/LBC, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions in the attached schedule. Preliminary Matters 3. There are two appeals on this site. They relate to the applications for planning permission and listed building consent for the same scheme. To avoid duplication, I have dealt with them together, except where otherwise indicated. 4. A revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published on the 17th of August 2026. I have considered its amendments against the earlier version and against the parties’ appeal evidence. I have also updated Framework references where necessary. However, I have not gone back to the parties for Appeal Decisions 6011362 and 6010766 2 comment, as I do not consider the Framework changes to be substantive or determinative to the outcome of these appeals. 5. Decision-makers have statutory duties placed on them by the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (the Act). Under section 72(1), I am required to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area. Also, under sections 16(2) and 66(1), I am required to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. The Framework sets out that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource and should be conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance. 6. Although the Council raises no objection with the proposed extension to the timber outbuilding, to reflect my statutory duties, I have also addressed this matter in my decisions. Main Issue (both appeals) 7. The main issue in both appeals is whether or not the proposal would preserve the Grade II listed building (listed as Home Lea, Ref.1317602) or any of the features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses, and its effect on the Alconbury Weston Conservation Area. Reasons 8. Both the earlier and revised versions of the Framework require proposals for development/works to be accompanied by an assessment of the significance of heritage assets affected (including any contribution made by their setting) and an assessment of the potential effects of the proposal on that significance. Also, that the level of detail should be no more than is necessary to understand significance and the potential effect. Given that this proposal would affect both the fabric of a listed building and is sited within a conservation area, the appellant’s heritage assessment accompanying the original application and appeals is lacking in detail and depth. Typically, inadequate information can result in poorly thought-out proposals, unforeseen harm to historic fabric and makes decision-making difficult. Clearer assessment in this case, including explanation and factual evidence could have assisted in more certainty with the applications and timely decisions. 9. The list description mentions that the building dates from the late 18th century or early 19th century and is a symmetrical house of two storeys with a rear wing. It mentions that it is timber framed and plastered with painted brick foundations and an asbestos roof replacing the original thatch. It describes various external architectural features including sash windows, some set in bay windows, and a central panelled door with pediment. 10. From the evidence before me, including the list description, and my own observations, I consider that the front range of the building is the earliest part, based on its narrow, tall proportions and steeply pitched roof, as well as its plinth detail and architectural features. From the form, appearance and detailing of the two-storey rear range, stepped in from the front part, this appears to be of later date. The appellant suggests that this was constructed in the 1950’s and this appears largely consistent with what I saw. At the very back of this gable end is the detached, single storey outhouse which is proposed to be demolished. This is Appeal Decisions 6011362 and 6010766 3 a small, rendered, brick and blockwork structure with a concrete foundation and a mono-pitch corrugated cement roof. Internally it has a simple, featureless interior. The appellant suggests that this structure was put up in 1983. Whilst the Council describe this building as historic, this is not clearly explained. From my assessment of it, externally and internally, and in the absence of anything further, I consider that it is a relatively modern, functional and utilitarian outbuilding. 11. Taking account of the above, I consider that the significance of the listed building, insofar as it relates to these appeals, is largely derived from the buildings’ age and surviving historic fabric, its plan form and architectural detailing. The building is a good example of an early vernacular building. Its form, use of traditional construction techniques and materials, and the legible phasing of the building elements make an important contribution to that significance. Whilst the detached, rear outbuilding is part of the building’s history and may contribute a small degree of understanding to how it has functioned over time, I am unable to see how this small, rather crude structure gives any meaning to the architectural or historic interest of the house or its wider plot. From what I have seen and read, given its approximate age, appearance and quality of construction, I consider that it makes little contribution, if any, to the building’s significance. 12. The appeal building is prominently sited within the conservation area, the significance of which is mainly drawn from the predominantly rural character and range of traditional buildings that it contains, together with the use of materials, the pattern of development and the relationship of buildings to the surrounding landscape. It forms part of a mainly linear scattering of buildings along High Street, several which are listed, and it makes a positive contribution to the character, appearance of that area. 13. In the light of my comments above, I have no objection to the demolition of the rear outbuilding, and I am satisfied that the overall significance of the listed building would not be harmed by its removal. It would be replaced by a larger structure attached to the main building which would be single storey and constructed in painted brick with a slate roof. The elevation drawings show that it would have traditional eaves and verges, a gable end chimney and sliding sash wooden windows with sills and lintels. 14. The extension would be of similar width to the existing gable end, but it would be off-set. Although it would protrude beyond the western side of the gable, given its form, massing and overall design, it would not disrupt the building’s overall T- shaped plan to any great degree. Therefore, it would still integrate well with the existing building and respect its overall plan form. Also, given the age of the building to which it would attach, there is little before me to suggest that any historic fabric would be affected by the formation of the connecting doorway. Subject to appropriate conditions to secure detailing and materials, the extension would cause no harm to the listed building’s significance or to the character and appearance of the conservation area. 15. It is proposed to add a 3-bay extension to an outbuilding that was erected in the late 20th century. The existing L-shaped timber structure would be extended to the rear and given its scale, design and materials it would be an appropriate addition to this building. I therefore find that it would cause no harm to the significance of the listed building or to the character and appearance of the conservation area, subject to appropriate conditions. Appeal Decisions 6011362 and 6010766 4 16. Although the appellant’s information to support heritage significance and the likely effect of the proposal is limited, I am satisfied that I have enough information before me to make a meaningful assessment. I am therefore able to reach a clear conclusion reflecting local and national requirements, including my statutory duties. 17. For these reasons, I conclude that the proposal would preserve the Grade II listed building and its features of special architectural or historic interest, and it would have no harmful effect on the Alconbury Weston Conservation Area. It would comply with Policies HE6 and HE9 of the Framework which, amongst other things, state that substantial weight should be given to an asset’s conservation, and that development proposals which have a positive effect on designated heritage assets should be supported. It would also comply with Policy LP12 and LP34 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (2019) which seek to underpin the national heritage objectives. Other Matters 18. The appellant has expressed concerns regarding the administration of the application. These matters, however, are for the Council and do not alter my findings on the main issue. Conditions 19. I have considered the conditions put forward by the Council and have amended the wording where necessary in the interests of clarity and to accord with the advice in the Framework and Planning Practice Guidance. In addition to the standard time limit condition, a condition requiring the development/works to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans is necessary in the interests of certainty. 20. I have also added a condition to ensure that facing materials are agreed with the Council for both the outbuilding and extension prior to above ground works commencing to ensure a high standard of finish and appearance to respect the heritage assets. For similar reasons, I have added a condition requiring the approval of building details. Conclusion (both appeals) 21. The proposal would accord with the development plan as a whole and material considerations do not lead me to decide otherwise. For these reasons, and having regard to all other matters raised, I conclude that both appeals should be allowed G Bayliss INSPECTOR Appeal Decisions 6011362 and 6010766 5 Schedule of Conditions (Both Decisions) 1) The development/works hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development/works hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing numbers: AR15 3C, Ground Floor Plan as Proposed; AR15 5B, Elevations as Proposed; AR15 7, Plan Section and Elevation as Proposed; Site Plan as Proposed Rev.A. 3) No development/works above ground level shall take place until details of all materials and finishes to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development/works hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development/works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 4) No development/works above ground level shall take place until construction details including joinery, rainwater goods, eaves and verges, flashing, chimney and other building detailing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development/works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.