PLAN NUMBER: / APPLICANT: / DATE RECEIVED:
2005/0498 & 2005/0497 / Mrs J O'Hare / 31/03/2005
WARD/PARISH: / CASE OFFICER: / STATUTORY DATE:
Newbarns / David Kitts
Tel: 01229 894938 / 25/05/2005
LOCATION:

Outbuildings at West Lodge, Abbey Road, Barrow-in-Furness

PROPOSAL:
Listed Building Consent for the erection of a two bedroom extension and specific changes to approved conversion (ref. 2001/0386)
Extension of out buildings to form new dwelling including variation to previously approved conversion (Ref: 01/0385)
LOCAL PLAN:

POLICY B13

Outside the existing settlements of Barrow and Dalton and the residential cordons outlined in Policy B11, the conversion of agricultural and other rural buildings to residential accommodation will not be permitted, unless:

a)The accommodation is to be occupied by those whose primary employment is in agriculture or forestry where a dwelling is essential for the working of a farm or woodland and there is no other suitable accommodation already available at the holding; or

b)The applicant has made every reasonable attempt to secure suitable business re-use and the application is supported by a statement of the efforts which have been made, the minimum of which must include the premises being advertised, at a realistic price, for a minimum of 12 months, that no reasonable offer has been refused and that evidence is provided to show the property has been advertised on the open market at least four times in local media at roughly equal periods over the year; or

c)Residential conversion is a subordinate part of a scheme for business re-use; and

d)The building is served by satisfactory access; and

e)The scale of the conversion is appropriate to the building, its character and location.

The building must be structurally sound and capable of conversion without major rebuilding, extensions or modifications to the existing structure, as demonstrated by the submission of a satisfactory structural survey.

POLICY D1The Borough’s countryside will be safeguarded for its own sake and non-renewable and natural resources afforded protection. Development will be permitted in the countryside only where there is a demonstrable need that cannot be met elsewhere. Where necessary development is permitted any adverse effect on the rural character of the surroundings should be minimised subject to the development’s operational requirements.
POLICY D15
Development within or affecting the setting of Conservation Areas will only be permitted where it preserves or enhances the character or appearance of the Area. In particular it should:
1.Respect the character of existing architecture and any historical associations by having due regard to positioning and grouping of buildings, form, scale, enclosure, detailing and use of traditional materials.
2.Respect existing hard and soft landscape features including open space, trees, walls and surfacing.
3.Respect traditional plot boundaries and frontage widths; and
4.Respect significant views into or out of the Areas.
Applications for:
a)Listed Building Consent
b)Planning consent for alterations to un-listed buildings within Conservation Areas or new buildings affecting the setting of a Listed Building
must show full details unless otherwise agreed with the Planning Authority.
POLICY D19
Development in and around the area between the Town Hall and Lawson Street and between the Town Hall and Forum 28 should, if possible, create open civic spaces and enhance the setting of the Town Hall. The publicly owned and accessible open areas at the core of these areas are formally designated hereby as Civic Open Space.
POLICY D20
The following sites in the Central Barrow Conservation Area are particularly identified as suitable for infill with buildings at a scale and design to complement adjoining buildings (subject to other planning criteria) -
  • Site of 116-118 Duke Street, Barrow (former Franchi building)
  • Site of 57 Duke Street, Barrow

  • Site of 80-82 Duke Street, Barrow
  • The Ramsden Square Bus Lay-by Area
POLICY D21
In determining all applications submitted to it the local planning authority will have regard to the General Design Code set out in paragraph 5.4.28 of this plan.
In towns and villages, proposals shall relate to the context provided by buildings, street and plot patterns, building frontages, topography, established public views, landmark buildings and other townscape elements. Proposals that do not respect the local context and street pattern or the scale, height, proportions and materials of surrounding buildings and development which constitutes over development of the site by virtue of scale, height or bulk will not be permitted, unless there is specific justification, such as interests of sustainability, energy efficiency or crime prevention.
Development proposals in the countryside shall respect the diversity and distinctiveness of local landscape character. New farm buildings will, in general, be required to be sited within or adjacent to an existing farm building complex or in other well screened locations and to be subject to a complementary design and use of materials, with, where necessary, a ‘planting’ scheme.
POLICY D27
Development proposals which result in the unacceptable loss of existing trees on development sites will not be permitted unless their loss is unavoidable, when the developer will be required to provide replacement trees on site or at other suitable sites nearby.
POLICY D29
A high standard of landscaping will be required of appropriate new development, both for the initial scheme and its long-term maintenance. Where possible, existing landscape features shall be integrated into landscape schemes. Where the District Council intends to adopt an area of landscaping, a commuted payment will be required to meet the cost of 10 years maintenance. The requirements of this policy will be implemented as a condition of planning consent, or by planning obligation as appropriate.
SUMMARY OF MAIN ISSUES:
Proposed extension in enclosed courtyard is of satisfactory design and compliments the 2001 approved dwelling reference 2001/0385 & 2001/0386 through the addition of 2 bedrooms.
NON MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
REPRESENTATIONS:

Development advertised on site and in the local press

The Occupiers of Furness Abbey Cottage, Abbey Tavern, Abbey Approach, Oaklands, Abbey House Hotel, The Gate House, West Lodge, Abbey Road, Barrow in Furness all informed..

Supporting Statement

“I have just received a copy of the planning report, to be held on Tuesday 21 St June 2005, and although I know it is to late for this letter to be seen by the councillors I would like you and Mr Wilton to know why Mr Flitcloft has sent his letter opposing the extension like he has.

Enclosed is a letter from Poole Townsend, showing that when I had the property for sale in November 2003 West Lodge at £350,000 and the Land at £100,000, Mr and Mrs Flitcroft asked for a copy of the plans for the conversion of the Gatehouse. They said that they only wanted it for a garden as the Gatehouse garden backed onto their field so they made an offer of £50,000 for the Gatehouse and land only. Not West Lodge which as you can see I never accepted as first the offer was far to low and also I did not believe their reasons, I then tried to auction the Gatehouse in September 2004 with Harrison and Coward which they then valued the land at £150,000. Mr Flitcroft rang up Trish from Harrison and Coward to complain, that I should accept their offer of £50,000 and that I had no right to auction off the Gatehouse to anybody else, and that I should sell the Gatehouse to them as they wanted to build it for their disabled son who is in his thirties. Trish informed Mr Flitcroft that if he wanted to buy the Gatehouse and gardens then he should bid in the auction at the proper value. Although Mr Flitcroft did come to the auction he did not bid a penny on it. He is hoping I don't get the planning approval as he only wants it to be 2 bedroom. He hoping I will sell if I don't get the extra bedrooms as I wont be able to live there having 3 children and it being only two bedrooms at the moment, but If I get the extension that will make four bedrooms, and I will be able to live there with my children so I would not have to sell the Gatehouse. Mr and Mrs Flitcroft wants my property for themselves, and obvious from his letter he will go to any lengths to get it. I do not know what he is on about regarding West Lodges garden wall being on his land he does not own the lane only the owner of West Lodge owns the lane Mr Flitcroft has right of way over it. The lane is private and only the Flitcrofts and invitees to Abbey House can use it. I do not own, and have nothing to do with West Lodge what so ever including the pine tree area covered in stone, I have myself contracted Mr Colin Phillips on this matter on three occasions as I think they: look a mess, but Mr Phillips inform me last week that as the sandstone is not damaging the trees so there is not a lot that can be done. Mr Browne the owner of West Lodge put the stone on the preservation order area once I had removed my name from West Lodge. I had the sandstone blocks removed from the front of the Gatehouse, and there is nothing more I can do, it is up to Mr Browne not me, but he would not clad the garage or wall when I lived with him, now that I have left him nearly two years lately he is hardly going to take any notice of me now.

The Gatehouse is not in a conservation area, but is a listed building, it was not built at the same time as West Lodge, it was built sometime later. I find it absolutely laughable that the Flitcrofts think that a run down stable is probably one the most important buildings in Barrow if not Cumbria, doesn't say a lot for all the other major historic properties in this area, its obvious by the enclosed letter that Mr Flitcrofts letter is just sour grapes, because I have the property and they want it to add to their empire!”

Poole Townsend

“In order that we adhere to the Estate Agents Act, as amended in July 1991, we can confirm that an offer of £50,000 subject to contract and survey, has been put forward by our prospective purchaser, Mrs C Flitcroft, on the above property.

We understand that this offer is not acceptable, but in the meantime please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any queries”.

Stephens Associates on behalf of the occupiers of Oaklands

“Further to your letter dated 8 April to The Occupier of Oaklands regarding the above, the owners of the property, Mr and Mrs K Flitcroft, have asked me to submit an objection to the proposed development.

Planning permission was of course granted for the conversion of the outbuildings into a two bedroom dwelling in 2001, reference 2001/0385, but it is now proposed to add a further two bedrooms to create a much larger residence. The Location Plan that was submitted with the planning application also includes the grassed area fronting Abbey Road and presumably this is intended to form part of the residential curtilage.

The application site lies within the Furness Abbey Conservation Area with the Abbey House Hotel, West Lodge, Abbey Wall and Oaklands Listed Buildings adjacent or close by. The remains of Furness Abbey are less than 250 metres to the east of the application site, which is also within its historic walled precinct, a Scheduled Ancient Monument. Taken together, these factors make this one of the most important Conservation Areas in Furness, if not the whole of Cumbria.

Government policy for the protection of Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas is set out in PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment. Detailed guidance on alterations to Listed Buildings is provided in Annex C and the proposal falls short of these requirements in several respects. Further advice on the preservation of archaeological remains is given in PPG16: Archaeology and Planning which makes it clear that these should be seen as a finite, and non-renewable resource, in many cases highly fragile and vulnerable to damage and destruction. Appropriate management is therefore essential to ensure that they survive in good condition. In particular, care must be taken to ensure that archaeological remains are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed. They can contain irreplaceable information about our past and the potential for an increase in future knowledge. They are part of our sense of national identity and are valuable both for their own sake and for their role in education, leisure and tourism. The Barrow Local Plan contains policies designed to protect Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas and Scheduled Ancient Monuments and the information submitted with the planning application fails to demonstrate that these will not be adversely affected. The critical test is provided by Policy D19, which states that development within or affecting the setting of a Conservation Area will only be permitted where it preserves or enhances the character of the area.

The site also sits in an attractive landscape that is of high value evoking a strong and definable subjective response ...the unique collection of archaeological features, layout and composition of planting... makes this area ...worthy of conservation. It is designated a Local Landscape in the Barrow Local Plan where development or land use changes detrimental to their distinctive character ...will not be allowed.

The group of Corsican Pine immediately to the east of the application site and the mixed woodland to the north are covered by the Abbey House Tree Preservation Order and the Barrow Local Plan designates the area as a Wildlife Corridor. These factors confirm the sensitivity of the site to any new development.

Previous appeal decisions on other development proposals within the grounds of Abbey House have confirmed that the application site is outside the built up areas of Barrow and Dalton where Local Plan Policy B13 stipulates that the conversion of agricultural and other rural buildings will not be permitted unless:

•the accommodation is to be occupied by those employed in agriculture or forestry; or

• every reasonable attempt has been made to secure a suitable business re-use; or

• residential conversion is a subordinate part of a scheme for business re-use; and

•the buildings is served by a satisfactory access; and

• the scale of the conversion is appropriate to the building, its character and location.

The present vehicular access to the site is substandard with the trees on Abbey Road severely limiting visibility. The shared access with Oaklands and the occupiers of West Lodge further complicates the unsatisfactory access arrangements and the addition of two further bedrooms will generate increased vehicular traffic, which can only exacerbate the situation. Although the application boundary includes land to the rear of the property that could provide sufficient car parking, our clients have rights of access over this.

The planning officer's report on the 2001 application that was considered by the Council's Planning Committee at its meeting on 2 October 2001 made reference to the incomplete building work behind West Lodge. Because of the importance of the local landscape as a conservation area, and the setting of the Grade II * hotel and of several Ancient Monuments of national importance, I consider that it would be appropriate to require the sandstone facing of the garage to he completed prior to the commencement of the conversion. It appears that little or no progress has been made since then with most of the walls in concrete blockwork. There are reclaimed sandstone blocks on the site presumably intended to face the blockwork but these are presently stored within an area covered by a Tree Preservation Order and in front of the gatehouse in full view of traffic entering the town along Abbey Road. The wall immediately behind the lodge encroaches onto the access to Oaklands and the alignment of this should be checked against the approved scheme drawings.

In the circumstances, the Council should be taking enforcement action to secure improvements to the site before being prepared to consider any further development proposals”.

The Occupier, West Lodge, Abbey Road, Barrow in Furness – dated 1st June 2005

“Thank you for your letter dated 26 May 2005. May I take this opportunity to thank both yourself and the Planning Committee for the consideration shown to me over what has indeed, been extremely difficult personal circumstances. Unfortunately due to Mrs OHare's nature, the difficulties are sure to continue.

You are probably aware that I have had to remove from the stables area, the sandstone purchased by me for the purposes of cladding. This area has been retained by Mrs OHare who insisted on an unreasonable timescale to remove the stone, otherwise she would dispose of it. This caused me considerable expense and unnecessary inconvenience. The original pallets had rotted and therefore the stone had to be re-palletise and relocated to its present position. I would like to relocate the stone to facilitate easier access to it.

I could not carry out any work on the property until title was transferred to me, this did not happen until mid November 2004. Whilst other essential maintenance and repair work has been carried out since then, the inclement winter and spring weather has prevented any cladding from taking place. In an effort to speed up the cutting and dressing of the sandstone, I have recently purchased a further cutting machine and have commissioned the manufacture of a mobile setting out table. This should enable a large number of blocks to be prepared, set out and then transported "en mass" to the relevant area to be clad, consequently saving a considerable amount of time. Previously each piece was cut, dressed and laid individually.