Report to Cabinet
29 September 2015
Subject:
Conservation Area Review Programme including the
Basingstoke Town Conservation Area Review and
Management Plan
Status:
Routine matter for decision
Report ref:
Ward(s):
All
Key Decision:
Yes
Key Decision / Ref:
924/PL
Report of:
Portfolio Holder for Planning and Infrastructure
Mike Townsend, Planning and Development Manager –
email: mike.townsend@basingstoke.gov.uk
Tel: 01256 845 307
Rachel White, Principal Conservation Officer – email:
rachel.white@basingstoke.gov.uk Tel: 01256 845287
Elaine Walters, Conservation Area Appraisals Officer –
email: elaine.walters@basingstoke.gov.uk Tel: 01256
845512
Contact officer:
Appendices:
Appendix 1 – Approved Prioritisation List for appraisal
reviews
Appendix 2 – Basingstoke Town Conservation Area
Appraisal and Management Plan
Appendix 3 – Basingstoke Town Article 4 Directions
Appendix 4 – Public Consultation results for the
Basingstoke Town Conservation Area Review and
Management Plan
Appendix 5 – Background papers. April 2014 Basingstoke
Town Conservation Area report to Cabinet, decision and
approved consultation and adoption methodology.




Papers relied on to
produce this report:




Cabinet report on Conservation Area Review and
Prioritisation, 03/03/2014. Decision Number: 11/2014.
1990 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation
Areas) Act, Sections 71 and 72
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 19962011.
Design and Sustainability SPD (Supplementary
Planing Document), Appendix 4; Conservation Areas.
Emerging Local Plan, April 2014, Policy EM11 – The
Historic Environment
English Heritage, Understanding Place: Conservation
Area Designation, Appraisal and Management, 2011.
Historic England. Historic Environment Advice Note 1,
2015, Conservation Area Designation, Appraisal and
1 of 9
Management, Consultation Draft.
1
Executive Summary
1.1
This report seeks support for the adoption of the review and management
plan for Basingstoke Town as planning policy and for the approach to
adoption of future conservation area reviews and management plans.
2
Recommendation
2.1
It is recommended that:
i.
Cabinet notes the Public Consultation results for the Basingstoke Town
Conservation Area Review and Management Plan (Appendix 4);
ii.
Cabinet adopt the attached Basingstoke Town Conservation Area
Appraisal Review and Management Plan, as planning policy (Appendix
2);
iii.
Cabinet approve the serving and confirmation of Article 4 directions on
specified areas within the Conservation Area to control permitted
development rights (Appendix 3);
iv.
Cabinet delegate authority to the Portfolio Holder for Planning and
Infrastructure to adopt (as planning policy) future conservation area
appraisal reviews and management plans, in consultation with local
Ward Members.
2 of 9
PRIORITIES, IMPACTS AND RISKS
Contribution to Council Priorities
This report accords with the council’s Budget and Policy Framework and directly
supports the Council Plan priorities of:

Planning policies that safeguard local distinctiveness.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Term
Definition
EPH
Economic, Planning and Housing Committee
(replaced P&I OSCOM in summer 2014)
GPDO
Town and Country Planning (General Permitted
Development) (England) Order 2015
HCC
Hampshire County Council
HE
Historic England, previously English Heritage
until 01/04/2015
NPPF
National Planning Policy Framework
NPPG
National Planning Policy Guidance
SPD
Supplementary Planning Document
MAIN CONSIDERATIONS
3
Background information
3.1
In 2014 Cabinet approved commencing a programme of review of the
Borough’s 47 conservation area appraisals and the development of
management plans for each conservation area as necessary, starting with
Basingstoke Town. This decision also approved the prioritisation methodology
and list (Appendix 1) and the approach to consultation and adoption for taking
forward a programme of Conservation Area Review.
3.2
At the time the above report was considered there was no resource in place to
take forward the programme of review beyond undertaking public consultation
on the draft review and management plan for Basingstoke Town. Since this
time a permanent part-time post (Conservation Area Appraisals Officer) has
been created to resource the review in response to concerns expressed by
the Planning and Infrastructure Committee and Cabinet. This post has now
been filled.
4
Basingstoke Town Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan
4.1
The Basingstoke Town Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan is
attached (Appendix 2). This is the first review to be completed using the 2014
Cabinet approved methodology, it sets a standard method of assessment and
formatting for future documents.
4.2
The public consultation report (Appendix 4) details feedback from the public
exhibition, the online survey and from internal colleagues. The report details the
3 of 9
changes to the management plan and appraisal review, as a result of
comments received. 82% of respondents felt that the report provided an
accurate description of the area. 72% of respondents agreed with the principle
of serving Article 4 directions and 63% of respondents agreed with
Management Plan.
4.3
Proposed Article 4 directions are set out in Appendix 3. These directions are to
be served on specified areas within the Conservation Area, to control permitted
development rights, to protect original historic features which positively
contribute to the character of the areas. Planning permission will need to be
sought for development on dwellinghouses that front on to highways, water
ways or open spaces in conservation areas for the following works:
any addition or alteration to the roof (Part 1 – Class A of the GPDO);
the provision of a building, enclosure or swimming pool (Class E Part 1 of the
GPDO)
the erection or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure.
(Part 2 – Class A of the GPDO);
the painting of the exterior of any building or work which would front a relevant
location (Part 2 – Class C of the GPDO);
the demolition of the whole or part of any gate, fence, wall or other means of
enclosure (Part 11 - Class C of the GPDO).
Within the Top of Town Character Area the painting of the exterior of any
building, fronting a highway, waterway or open space will also require planning
permission.
4.5
Status of documents once adopted – The conservation area appraisals and
management plans will have SPD status as appended to Appendix 4
(Conservation Areas) of the Design and Sustainability SPD.
4.6
As a result of the Basingstoke Town Conservation Area Review, the online
advice to residents on Article 4 directions will be improved, to make the advice
more accessible and user friendly.
4.7
Recent alterations to properties in the proposed Article 4 areas, under
permitted development, such as the inappropriate painting of facades and
replacement doors and windows, demonstrate that the properties that
contribute to the character of the conservation area are under real threat. The
proposed Article 4 Directions sit alongside the appraisal review, which sets out
the evidence base in detail.
4.8
Serving of Article 4 Directions – It is proposed that the individual service of
notice of the direction on individual owners or occupiers within the Top of Town
Character Area, would be impracticable given the number of owners and
occupiers and the difficulty in identifying and locating those owner occupiers.
The GPDO in this instance allows the local planning authority to serve notice of
the direction via a press notice.
4.9
Individual notice of the direction will be served on the owners or occupiers of
dwellinghouses and for statutory undertakers and Crown Land within the Top of
Town area.
4 of 9
4.10 A leaflet drop and a Press Release will also publicize the Top of Town and
residential Article 4 directions.
4.11 A briefing note will be prepared for owners and occupiers of commercial
building and flats, within the conservation area, to explain their restricted
permitted development rights. For example whilst repairs are allowed to be
carried out, without planning permission, any material alteration to the
appearance of the building would require an application for planning
permission.
5.
Proposed delegation to Portfolio Holder to adopt Appraisal Reviews and
Management Plans
5.1
Following the successful appointment of the Conservation Area Appraisals
Officer, further consideration has been given to the previously approved
approach to adoption of the reviewed appraisals and management plans
(Appendix 5). It is considered that the most efficient and effective means of
adoption would be to delegate this function to the Portfolio Holder for Planning
and Infrastructure in consultation with local ward members, in line with similar
planning policy documents including Neighbourhood Plans.
5.2
In addition to the approved approach to consultation and adoption it is also
proposed to allow for more public engagement in the review process by
involving communities from the start of the review, carrying out initial survey
work and identifying their 'valued landscapes' as defined in the National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and to accord with the latest advice from
Historic England (formerly English Heritage) which considers that community
involvement in the initial survey work adds “depth and a new perspective to
the local authority view”.
5.3
The approach to public consultation and adoption now proposed would
therefore be:
1. Initial engagement. Undertake preliminary site surveys and historical data
gathering. Include involvement with ward members/town councils/parish councils,
local interest groups and local community groups, for their initial surveys where
appropriate.
2. Appraisal review. Draft conservation area appraisal and management plan for
consultation with input from internal consultees and ward members. This will include
the identification of areas where removal of ‘permitted development rights’ may be
necessary to prevent the loss of characteristic architectural detailing or gradual
erosion of the character and appearance of the conservation area through
inappropriate development.
3. 1st stage stakeholder engagement. Circulation of the draft review and
management plan to relevant community representatives with 2 weeks for feedback.
This will include Ward Members and Town/Parish Councils where relevant and may
also include other consultees such as local Historical Societies.
5 of 9
4. 2nd stage community engagement. Usually taking the form of a public exhibition
or meeting, publicised by a press notice, mail drop and updated website details,
generally accompanied with an online consultation for 6 weeks.
5. Post-consultation. Comments from public consultation are addressed via changes
to the management plan and appraisal, where necessary and summarised in a
consultation report.
6. Changes to drafts. Made to the management plan and appraisal, as a result of
consultation comments.
7. Decision on adoption to be taken by; The Portfolio Holder for Planning and
Infrastructure, in consultation with local ward members, following a Portfolio Holder’s
report for formal decision, from the Conservation Area Appraisals Officer. Para 7.7 of
Article 7 of the Borough Council Constitution, allows the: Delegation of Functions and
states inter alia: “The Leader may delegate executive functions to: c) an individual
Cabinet Member.”
5.4
In the unlikely event that the results of public consultation show 60% or more
of respondents disagree with the conclusions of the appraisal or the
proposals in the Management Plan, it is proposed that the Portfolio Holder
refers these reports to Cabinet for a decision to be taken.
5.5
Appendix 5 also includes the adopted 2014 Consultation and Adoption
Methodology, which included an outline of initial public engagement.
6.
Corporate Implications
6.1
Financial Implications
6.1.1 The cost of undertaking the reviews of the Borough’s conservation areas and the
production of a management plan, are met by existing budgets.
6.1.2 The Management Plan recognizes in Para.1. that any environmental
improvements sought in the conservation area are subject to resource
implications.
6.1.3 There is the potential for an increase in non-fee earning applications in Article 4
areas, the withdrawal of permitted development rights by an Article 4 direction
may also give rise to a claim for compensation if a planning application is
refused, or granted subject to conditions. Compensation may be claimed for
abortive expenditure or other loss or damage directly attributable to the
withdrawal of the permitted development rights. However, a 2008 survey of 72
Local Planning Authorities, who had served Article 4 directions found no
compensation claims had been made.
7.
Risk Issues
Should the council fail to make progress with a programme of conservation area
review, the following risks could face the council:
6 of 9

Likelihood of challenges at planning appeal and appeals being allowed due to
inaccuracies and out of date information contained within the existing
appraisals;

Erosion of the existing character and appearance of conservation areas due to
currently unidentified positive buildings, spaces and trees and scope for their
loss or development;

Erosion of character through the limited understanding of character areas and
their particular management issues resulting in poorly informed development;

With no management plans in place there are limited provisions to pro-actively
preserve and enhance the character and appearance of conservation areas or
put in place measures to address issues/ sites that are having a harmful
impact;

As time goes on the existing appraisals will become increasingly out of date
and will therefore require greater costs and time to review them in the future;

Failure (consequently) to meet statutory requirements to from time to time
review conservation areas and to formulate and publish proposals for their
preservation or enhancement;

Failure (consequently) to comply with best practice which is to undertake
conservation area reviews every 5 years;

Increased workload for planners, conservation officers and landscape
architects assessing development impact on the character and appearance of
the conservation area, and on the significance of heritage assets on a case by
case basis, whilst the appraisal review provides an updated assessment.
7.1
HR Issues
7.1.1
None arising from this report
7.2
Equalities
7.2.1
When considering the council’s public sector equalities duty, the plans will take
into account accessibility for all groups.
7.3
Legal Implications
7.3.1
None arising from this report.
7.4
Any Other Implications
7.4.1
None at this stage.
8.
Communication and Consultation
8.1
The Management Plan and Appraisal have been the subject of internal
consultation and changes have been made to address comments.
7 of 9
8.2
The proposed consultation methodology moving forwards is set out above in
Para. 5.3.
9.
Economic, Planning and Housing Committee Comment
9.1
The Committee considered the report on Thursday 23 July 2015 and made the
following comments.

Ward councillors should be invited to contribute to discussions throughout the
appraisal process and the decision on adoption to be taken by the Portfolio
Holder in consultation with local ward members. (Officer comment: Agreed.
See Para. 5 above for revised method for engagement);

The report should place more emphasis on Eastrop House’s period style and
features. (Officer comment: Agreed. Appraisal has been amended);

Officers should give more guidance to residents on which modern building
materials are permissible to be used in historic buildings. Doors and windows
were highlighted as common materials in need of replacement. (Officer
comment: the council webpage will be updated to make advice to residents
more accessible);

It can be difficult for residents to source specialist heritage building work
without the help of council officers. (Officer comment: the council has a list of
specialist contractors, for flint work or traditional joinery for example, these lists
can be made available on our web page and to Customer Services team to
make advice to residents more accessible).
9.2
The Economic, Planning and Housing Committee resolved that:
1) The committee endorses the proposal for Cabinet to adopt the Basingstoke
Town Conservation Area Appraisal Review and Management Plan, as planning
policy.
2) The committee supports the proposal for Cabinet to approve the serving and
confirmation of Article 4 directions on specified areas within the Conservation
Area to control permitted development rights.
3) The committee endorses the proposal for Cabinet to delegate authority to the
Portfolio Holder for Planning and Infrastructure to adopt (as planning policy), in
consultation with ward members, future conservation area appraisal reviews
and management plans.
10.
Changes to the Conservation Area Appraisal since Cabinet Briefing
10.1
Since Cabinet Briefing on 02/09/2015 some minor drafting errors in the
Appraisal have been identified. Two small areas of highways land were
proposed to be included within the conservation area boundary, however
these areas were not annotated correctly, as proposed inclusions, on the
published Conservation Area maps. Further, there are two areas which were
8 of 9
proposed to be excluded in the Appraisal, but were not annotated as
proposed exclusions on the Conservation Area maps. Due to the subsequent
lack of public consultation, the Appraisal has been amended to delete
reference to these proposed inclusions and exclusions. The two small,
proposed inclusions were as follows: (i) an area of pavement opposite the
White Hart public house on London Road; (ii) an area of grass verge at the
northern end of Church Street. The two proposed exclusions were as follows:
(i) on the approaches to Victory Roundabout along Timberlake Road, the
boundary was proposed to follow the kerb edge on the east side of
Timberlake Road; (ii) the 1977 boundary cuts across Verum House on New
Street, the boundary was proposed to be altered to retain the street frontage
part of the building but to exclude the structure that projects to the rear.
11.
Conclusion
11.1
Members are requested to support the recommendations set out in Section 2
of this report.
9 of 9