DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE - 17 AUGUST 2010
APPLICATION NO DC/10/0756/FUL & DC/10/0871/CAC
10
LOCATION
Lord Nelson Inn
Mill Road
Holton
Halesworth
Suffolk
IP19 8PP
EXPIRY DATE
8 August 2010
APPLICATION TYPE
Full Application
APPLICANT
Mr Roger Barnes
PARISH
Holton
PROPOSAL
Demolition of side and rear extensions and replace with new 2 storey rear
and side extensions and provision of restaurant facility. Replacement of
existing windows. (Planning and Conservation Area Applications)
SUMMARY
The proposal is to refurbish and significantly extend the Lord Nelson Public House in order to reopen it as a pub and restaurant facility with living accommodation above. The building is within the
Holton Conservation Area and is highlighted within the conservation area appraisal as being of
local importance. The Lord Nelson has been closed for a considerable period of time. Whilst the
re-opening of the pub is to be welcomed, there are significant concerns with the way in which the
building is proposed to be extended and altered to facilitate this.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The Lord Nelson is set in a prominent location within the conservation area fronting Mill Road and
can clearly be seen across the village green from The Street. The “locally listed” building is a
37
substantial eighteenth century structure, with steep pitched clay pantile roof. The roof pitch is
canted at the front to accommodate a brick façade with pilasters rising through two storeys. It is ‘L’
shaped in plan, the rear range being lower than the front, with the front continuing with a single
storey extension with gabled pantile roof. The main range has external end brick stacks and the
rear range has a tall axial brick stack. It has a 3 window façade, articulated by four pilasters, with
timber casement windows of 9 and 12 panes.
PROPOSAL
The proposal is to extend the building with a two storey side extension and a two storey rear
extension across the entire width of the extended building. This would require the demolition of the
rear wing and associated chimney and the single storey side extension. A porch would be formed
on the side of the building as the main entrance to the pub, part of the proposal is to replace the
timber casement windows with timber sliding sash windows. The enlarged building would allow for
a separate bar and restaurant facility, kitchen and serving area, office, store and toilet facilities at
ground floor level. The first floor accommodation would comprise 4 bedrooms (2 en-suites) a
bathroom, dining room, study, kitchen and 2 large landing areas. The outside area would remain
much the same as existing with a parking area and substantial garden.
CONSULTATIONS/COMMENTS
No comments were received from neighbours.
Consultees
Design And Conservation were consulted on the 21 June 2010 – Replied on 28th July 2010 Although any proposal to re-open a closed pub is to be welcomed, in this case the agent has failed
to demonstrate, in line with policy HE6 of PPS5, that the proposed scheme is based on a
reasonable understanding of the significance of this 'heritage asset', and has in fact demonstrated
a misunderstanding of it, resulting in an extremely poor scheme for the building and the
conservation area in which it sits. On the basis of poor design and in line with PPS1, this
application should therefore be refused or withdrawn, and a new application invited which properly
addresses its numerous shortcomings.
Parish Council were consulted on the 21 June 2010 – Replied 16th July 2010 - No objection but
there should be a condition that wooden framed windows be used – not plastic.
PUBLICITY
The application has been the subject of the following press advertisement:
Category
Published
Expiry
Publication
Conservation Area,
25.06.2010
15.07.2010
Beccles and
23.07.10
12.08.10
Journal
Conservation Area,
25.06.2010
23.07.10
15.07.2010
12.08.10
Bungay
Lowestoft Journal
SITE NOTICES
The following site notices have been displayed:
WDC General Site Notice
Reason for site notice: Conservation Area, Date posted
DC/10/0756/FUL
25.06.2010 Expiry date 15.07.2010
DC/10/0871/CAC
Reason for site notice: Conservation Area, Date posted
23.07.2010 Expiry date 12.08.2010
38
PLANNING POLICY
Adopted Local Plan (November, 1996)
Policy ENV20 “Conservation Areas” requires development within conservation areas to respect the
character of the village, to be in scale and harmony with the surrounding buildings, to use
appropriate architectural details, external materials that are sympathetic to the surrounding area
and retain natural features.
Interim Local Plan (May 2004)
Policy ENV15 “Development in Conservation Areas” requires development within a conservation
area to conserve and enhance the appearance of the conservation area through appropriate
design and location. The mass of the buildings should be of an appropriate scale and harmony
with the surrounding area. Architectural detailing should be used to enhance the character of the
area. External materials should be sympathetic with the character of the area.
DC2 “Design” - Development, including extensions will only be permitted where the design is
sympathetic to the site and its surroundings.
ENV17 “Replacement windows in Conservation areas” – Proposals for replacement windows in
conservation areas must be of a suitable design.
Core Strategy (Adopted January 2009)
CS17 “Built and Historic Environment” - Proposals for development are expected to conserve or
enhance Conservation areas and buildings of local importance. The Conservation Area appraisals
play an important role in making decisions on planning applications and this policy is to be read in
conjunction with the relevant Conservation Area Appraisal.
CS02 “High Quality and Sustainable Design” – All development proposals must demonstrate a
high quality and sustainable design that positively improves the character, appearance and
environmental quality of an area and the way it functions, this includes protecting historic character
and local distinctiveness.
Development Management Policies – Development Plan Document – Proposed Submission
(Final Draft) – January 2010
DM02 “High Quality and Sustainable Design” – Planning permission will normally be granted
where proposed development is sympathetic to the site and its surroundings. Developments
should be in keeping with the overall character of the existing building. Conservation area
appraisals provide detailed local context for the consideration of development proposals.
DM15 “Neighbourhood and Village Shops and Facilities” – In rural areas pubs, village shops and
facilities are important to local communities, reducing the need to travel and benefit quality of life
as places for social interaction.
DM30 “Protecting and Enhancing the Historic Environment” – Development proposals including
alterations and extensions, should preserve or enhance the character and appearance of
conservation areas, protecting the architectural and historic interest, including locally important
buildings identified by Waveney District Council in the ‘Local list’ and their settings through high
quality design.
39
National Guidance
Planning Policy statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (2005) – Good design ensures
attractive useable, durable, and adaptable places and is a key element in achieving sustainable
development. Good design is indivisible from good planning.
Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (2010) – The governments
overarching aim is that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and
enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. To achieve this the
government has various objectives including putting heritage assets to appropriate and viable uses
that is consistent with their conservation and recognising that intelligently managed change may
sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained for the long term.
Policy HE6 of PPS 5 states that a description of the significance of the heritage asset affected and
the contribution of their setting to that significance. The level of detail should be proportionate to
the importance of the heritage asset and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential
impact of the proposal. The heritage asset itself should have been assessed using appropriate
expertise. This information together with an assessment of the impact of the proposal should be
set out in the application as part of the explanation of the design concept. It should detail the
sources considered and the expertise consulted.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
The Local Planning Authority is encouraged that the applicant is proposing to re-open the Lord
Nelson Public House. This building is situated within a designated Conservation Area and is noted
as being of local importance. This building is situated in a prominent part of the village and is an
important community facility.
Planning Policy Statement 5 “Planning for the Historic Environment” is national planning guidance
and was published in March of this year. This guidance was introduced by the government as an
update to and an amalgamation of PPG15 & 16. This guidance is aimed at gaining an
understanding of the significance of a heritage asset, this is vital to a successful scheme, one that
proposes the optimum viable use of a building, taking advantage of the historic asset’s
significance, while also conserving it through good design, as encouraged by PPS1.
The applicant has failed to provide a suitable heritage statement, which should be the starting
point to designing a scheme in a building of this significance. This should be carried out by a
suitably qualified person including an assessment of the building, which shows an understanding
of the significance of the heritage asset and the impact that the proposal would have on it. Without
inspection of the interior of the building, this appears to be an eighteenth century timber framed
and rendered building, which has been ‘fronted’ in the early 19th century, with an attractive
symmetrical brick façade under a clay pantile roof. SCC Archaeology has confirmed that there are
no recorded archaeological remains on the site. The heritage statement referred to in policy E6 of
PPS5 in this context relates to the building itself rather than any under ground archaeological
remains.
The applicant has drawn attention to a BBC News report (Published 24th November 2008) which
suggests that in order for pubs to re-open as a viable business enlargement is needed. This may
be a reasonable statement to make but no justification has been submitted as to how the size of
the proposed extension would relate to the viability of the business. Whilst it would seem
reasonable to expect that the ground floor to be extended to provide the extra facilities needed for
the business to be viable. It is the extent of the first floor accommodation proposed which would
cause the most harm to the character and appearance of the existing building.
The replacement of the existing single storey side extension on the south elevation with a two
storey ‘in-line’ extension would destroy the symmetry of the existing frontage. This would be
contrary to well-established design principles, which are set out in the Suffolk Design Guide, which
dictate that extensions should be subsidiary to the main bulk of the building. The two storey rear
40
extension would necessitate the removal of the rear projecting wing; the demolition in itself would
be a loss to the host building. The proposed rear extension is very large in scale and would create
an inappropriate form, which would be out of character with the scale of this building within the
conservation area. This would provide a large amount of commercial and residential
accommodation. If this amount of additional floor space can be justified, a more inventive solution
should be sought.
The site has a considerable size garden area, which appears to be retained as existing. The
proposal does not seem to offer any access to this area from the pub/restaurant, other than from
the main entrance. This could be a positive aspect of this site, if it was incorporated into the
scheme better. It is unclear what is intended for this area, whether it is for the enjoyment of the
occupiers of the residential accommodation or for the public house.
Another significant part of the proposal is the replacement of the windows in this building. Policy
ENV17 “Replacement windows in Conservation areas” explains what is expected in terms of
replacement of windows. Although most of the windows in this building have been replaced, the
style of the existing windows is in line with local historic timber casement windows (with metal
lights on pintle hinges), which they almost certainly replaced. The proposal to replace the existing
casement windows with vertical sliding sashes is contrary to the Council’s window policy in terms
of design. The proposal initially stated that the windows would be UPVC; the agent has now stated
that they would in fact be timber.
The application states that the roof would be tiled with concrete interlocking pantiles, when the
existing building has a traditional clay overlapping pantile. Also any proposal for this building
should add some positive improvements to the building. For example, the re-introduction in the
front façade of the central front door, whether functional or not, as this was an important feature of
the building.
CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT
Demolition of the two storey rear and single storey extension – DC/10/0871/CAC
No information has been submitted regarding the historic significance of the structures proposed to
be demolished. The single storey wing appears to be timber framed as is the main building,
although brick work has been introduced at ground floor level; it is likely that this is part of the
original structure. This wing and tall axial chimney all contribute to the important views within the
conservation area as highlighted in the conservation area appraisal adopted in 2006. This
proposal would result in an unacceptable loss of historic rear extension and should be resisted,
unless a significantly better scheme for its replacement can be negotiated.
CONCLUSION
This is a proposal which the Local Planning Authority would like to be able to support; however
there are too many deficiencies to this proposal which would have a detrimental impact on the
character and appearance of the building within the conservation area. This proposal does not
either preserve or enhance the appearance of the conservation area, which is the main
consideration when assessing proposals in such locations (Policy CS17, Core Strategy).
RECOMMENDATION
Refuse – Detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the “Locally Listed” building
within the conservation area.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
CONTACT
Case File DC/10/0756/FUL held in Planning Office, Marina
Centre, Lowestoft.
Iain Robertson Tel: 01502 523067
41