Statement of Significance & Heritage Statement - Rother ...

Architectural Designers & Historic Buildings Consultants

The Spinney, St Marys Lane Bexhill on Sea, East Sussex TN39 5JE

TEL: 01424 210386 Email: [email protected] Web: www.dgc-consultants.com

Registered Office: The Spinney St Marys Lane Bexhill on Sea E.Sussex TN39 5JE

DGC (Historic Buildings) Consultants Limited

Registered in England and Walles No. 239686 VAT Reg No. 914 8059 18

STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE & HERITAGE STATEMENT

in connection with

Wilton House Cottage

CATSFIELD

on behalf of

Mrs Heather Randall-Nason

prepared by

DEBORAH GARDNER IHBC PG Dip (Bldg Cons)

REF: DGC21702

Date of Issue: 05/07/2017

Web: www.dgc-consultants.com

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.dgc-consultants.com/

Statement of Significance & Heritage Statement: Wilton House Cottage Catsfield On behalf of Mrs H Randall-Nason

General Description

Wilton House Cottage is a twentieth century building that is likely to have been built as an agricultural building to supplement those within the historic farmstead of Broomham Farm. It is situated adjacent to Broomham House a grade II listed building and as such any proposed development should be in accordance with local and national policy preserve or enhance the significance of a designated heritage asset which includes its setting. Broomham Bungalow is contained within an archaeological notification area which identifies a Saxon Farm 410AD-1065 and Settlement AD 11th century – Post Medieval (1000 AD to 1900 AD). The property is within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and located down a private track off the 1066 Country Wallk, accessed from the B2204 within the village of Catsfield.

Geographic Context

Catsfield is a village and civil parish in the Rother District of East Sussex and is located six miles north of Bexhill and three miles south west of Battle.

Historic Context of Catsfield

The village was first documented in the Domesday Book of 1086, where it was recorded “there is a little church serving the hall”. The village once consisted of two manors, Catsfield and Catsfield Levett. Thomas Lyvet (Levett), held the lordship of the manor of Catsfield in 1445 but forfeited it, along with the Lordship of Firle, for his debts. The manor of Catsfield Levett remained in the family bearing the same name for centuries until the 17th century, when an heiress carried it into the Eversfield family. The Levett family held land across Sussex and were also influential in the iron making industry which was prevalent in the area.

Landscape Character Assessment

The High Weald is a historical countryside of rolling hills draped by small, irregular fields, abundant woods

and hedges, scattered farmsteads and sunken lanes.

The term 'Weald', meaning wilderness or forest, is given to the area between the North and South Downs

which are the outer chalk rims of the ancient Wealden anticline and was once an untamed, wooded area,

with patches of wild grassland and heathland. By Domesday (1086) the High Weald remained the most

densely wooded area of England and now boasts the highest proportion of ancient woodland in the country.

Detailed analysis by the High Weald AONB unit has defined the area as ‘characterised by dispersed

settlement; ancient route ways; small ancient woods, gills and shaws; and small, irregularly shaped and

productive fields. These are all draped over deeply incised and ridged landforms and are closely related to

socio-economic characteristics that have roots extending deep into history.’ The essential character of the

High Weald was established by the 14th century and has survived major historical events, and social and

technological changes. This fundamental and largely unchanging character is the essence of the "natural

beauty" of the AONB.

The dispersed historic settlements of farmsteads, hamlets and late medieval villages are characterised by

distinctive brick, tile and white weatherboard houses, and oasthouses. There are still traces of the ancient

and once very prosperous Wealden iron industry including traditional hammer ponds.

The unique Wealden landscape of small fields and scattered farmsteads was created by pioneer farmers of

the late medieval period. The early settlements in this period were formed on the better warm soils, the

drier ridge tops and the river valleys, the latter two being the main lines of communication.

The wooded relief and comparative inaccessibility historically provided the High Weald with a sense of

enclosure and remoteness that can still be appreciated today, and which contrasts strongly with the more


open nature of the surrounding Low Weald and the generally populous and urbanized nature of south-east

England as a whole.

Farming was always a marginal activity in the High Weald. This, combined with the area's relative

inaccessibility, made it historically one of the least prosperous areas of south-east England. However, the

rapid growth of the iron industry from about 1490, together with the development of crafts such as weaving

and tanning, made it, for a time, one of the wealthiest districts of England. By the 18th and 19th centuries

these activities had moved to more favourable areas, leaving farming as the mainstay of the rural economy,

though the majority of farms were and remain small and seldom very profitable.

The High Weald AONB was designated under the National Park and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 in

October 1983. The key characteristic of the High Weald National Character Area Profile published on

Natural England’s website is included within the Appendix.

Designations

Wilton House Cottage is positioned adjacent to Broomham House, the 19th century historic farmstead including Broomham Barn. As such the proposals have considered the setting of the designated heritage assets in accordance with local and national policy. Broomham House designated Grade II on the 13 May 1987 and is described as: L-shaped house. The south-east wing is a restored late C16 timber-framed building with plaster and some herring-bone brick infilling. Tiled roof. Casement windows. 2 storeys and attic. 3 windows. One hipped dormer. Contemporary interior. The north-west wing is a C19 addition.

Broomham House draws its significance from its archaeological value, as a standing timber-framed building dated to the 16th century; its architectural character and appearance as a property of the local vernacular and historically informing upon its association with the landscape and the social status of the landowners (including the property) and the tenant working the land.

Barn at Broomham to the South East of the House designated Grade II on the 13 May 1987 and is described as: C18. Ashlar and tarred weather-boarding. Hipped tiled roof with pentice to west half of north front.

Broomham Barn draws its significance from its architectural character and appearance as an 18th century farmstead building of the local vernacular. The barn informs upon the historic use of the land and as such is considered to have historic value.

The site is contained within Broomham Archaeological Notification Area which identifies an Early Medieval (Saxon) settlement and later farmstead.

Policy and Guidance

Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires that special regard must be had to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest. Case law has determined that the concept of ‘preserve’ has been interpreted to mean to ‘cause no harm’ (Barnwell Manor Wind Energy Ltd v East Northamptonshire District Council: English Heritage; National Trust; the SoS CLG [2014] EWCA Civ 137). The importance of listed buildings as heritage assets and a finite resource is emphasised in the National Planning Policy Framework (2012) (the Framework), its accompanying online National Planning Policy Guidance (2014) (PPG) and the more recent guidance from Historic England in the form of Good Practice Guidance in Planning Notes 1, 2 and 3 issued in March 2015. The Framework was introduced in March 2012 and provides a full statement of the Government’s planning policies. Within the 12 core planning principles that underpin plan-making and decision-taking, planning should “conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance, so that they can be enjoyed for their contribution to the quality of life of this and future generations” (NPPF, 2012).


For heritage policy purposes, ‘conserve’ is defined by the NPPF as “the process of maintaining and managing change to a heritage asset in a way that sustains, and where appropriate, enhances it significance” (NPPF, Annexe 2, Glossary, 2012). Significance is defined as “the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting” (NPPF, Annexe 2, Glossary). Setting is defined as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may take a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral” (Historic England, Guidance Note 3, 2015). Chapter 12 of the Framework sets out the Government’s policies for the conservation and enhancement of the historic environment. Paragraph 128 requires applicants to demonstrate that they have an understanding of the significance of any heritage asset and that “the level of detail should be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance.” Specific guidance is provided in the Framework on the assessment of significance and the impact of proposals in paragraphs 131 to 135. Paragraph 131 requires that in determining planning applications, local planning authorities should take account of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic viability; and, the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. Paragraph 132 requires when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, that great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation and the more important the asset, the greater that weight should be. It is also recognised that heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. It is noted that substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building should be exceptional and substantial harm to or loss of designated heritage assets of the highest significance should be wholly exceptional. In addition, the following policies from the 2014 Adopted Rother Core Strategy are relevant:

Policy PC1: Presumption in favour of sustainable development: “(i) When considering development proposals, a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework will be taken. (ii) Planning applications that accord with the policies in the Local Plan (and, where relevant, with policies in a Neighbourhood Plan) will be dealt with promptly and approved unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Account will be taken of whether policies are upto-date, having regard to most recent monitoring information, as well as policies of the National Planning Policy Framework”. Policy OSS4: General Development Considerations “In addition to considerations set out by other policies, all development should meet the following criteria: (i) It meets the needs of future occupiers, including providing appropriate amenities and the provision of appropriate means of access for disabled users; (ii) It does not unreasonably harm the amenities of adjoining properties; (iii) It respects and does not detract from the character and appearance of the locality; (iv) It is compatible with both the existing and planned use of adjacent land, and takes full account of previous use of the site; (v) In respect of residential development, is of a density appropriate to its context, having due regard to the key design principles”.

Policy EN2: Stewardship of the Historic Built Environment: “Development affecting the historic built environment, including that both statutorily protected and the non-statutorily protected, will be required to: (i) Reinforce the special character of the district’s historic settlements, including villages, towns and suburbs, through siting, scale, form and design; (ii) Take opportunities to improve areas of poor visual character or with poor townscape qualities; (iii) Preserve, and ensure clear


legibility of, locally distinctive vernacular building forms and their settings, features, fabric and materials, including forms specific to historic building typologies; (iv) Make reference to the character analysis in Conservation Area Appraisals, where relevant; (v) Reflect current best practice guidance produced by English Heritage and HELM59; (vi) Ensure appropriate archaeological research and investigation of both above and below-ground archaeology, and retention where required”.

Statement of Significance

Significance is considered to be the sum of the cultural and natural heritage values of a place, as defined

by its evidential value (the potential of a place to yield evidence about past human activity); historical value

(the ways in which past people, events and aspects of life can be connected through a place to the

present), aesthetic value (the ways in which people draw sensory and intellectual stimulation from a place)

and communal value (the meanings of a place for the people who relate to it, or for whom it figures in their

collective experience or memory) (English Heritage, Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance 2008).

Fig Satellite image from Google maps

Broomham Barn

Broomham House


Current Google aerial mapping of site

(source: Google 2017)


Setting

Historic England’s Guidance Note 3: The Setting of Heritage Assets (2015) defines setting as:

“the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and

its surroundings evolve. Elements of a setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of

an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral…it does not have a fixed boundary

and cannot be definitively and permanently described for all time…what comprises a heritage asset’s setting may

change as the asset and its surroundings evolve or as the asset becomes better understood or due to the varying

impacts of different proposals”.

Landscape

Wilton House Cottage is situated immediately adjacent to the historic farmstead of Broomham which is

located in the Combe Haven Valley as defined by the 2016 East Sussex Landscape Character Assessment.

The Landscape Evaluation describes this area as:

“…a largely unspoilt and tranquil rural landscape with few instrusive features. The landscape is in generally good condition and well managed as farmland with some surviving historic structure. Agricultural change has led to some gentrification of the rural landscape and villages. As with most of the High Weald landscape the historic field patterns of small fields and significant hedgerows remain intact in the northern part of the area”. The farmstead at Broomham is characteristic of the landscape features identified as positive attributes of the

Combe Haven Valley.

Map Regression

Yeakell and Gardner’s map of Sussex dated 1778-1783 shows Broomham House set down a track north of Catfield

Green. The map sets out the historic field boundaries and clearly identifies the natural ponds on the opposite side

of the track to the north east of Brromham House. The map is not sufficiently detailed to show the building group

relating to an earlier hsitoric farmstead, its form and position relative to the main house.

Fig Yeakell and Gardner map of Sussex 1778-1783

The 1839 Tithe Map for Catsfield, identifiies the landowner as Acland (Peregrine Palmr, Fuller Palmer, bt). However

the lands were tenanted by John Hook and farmed under the alias Broomham and Downlands Farm comprising


arable including turnip field, pasture and hops, pasture and house and garden. The woods, inlcuding Moors Wood,

were retained by the landowner.

Broomham House is depicted on the Tithe map to the South East of Broomham Farm which is indicated by a large

T-shaped structure with small outshot to the east and a small linear building to the north west. The Tithe map

clearly pre-dates the construction of the 19th century historic farmstead buildings

Fig Catsfield Tithe by W.Rider 1839

The first Ordnance survey, published in 1878 shows Broomham House and the famstead buildings, including barn

and stable building with hayloft over, which remain today. The farmstead is arranged to the west and south west

of the house.

Fig Ordnance Survey Sussex LVII.NW 1878

The revised Ordnance Survey, published in 1899 shows a number of alterations to the farmstead. The narrow

range south of the barn has been removed, whilst the ‘L-shaped’ building to the west of the house has been


extended to the south east. The pair of buildings located south west of the house have also undergone some

alteration; the most northerly being truncated to show a linear building.

Fig Ordnance Survey Sussex LVII.NW 1899

By the 1910 Ordnance Survey the building which is the subject of this application had been constructed, south of

the house and to the east of the historic farmstead building. The subject building appears as a linear structure of

modest depth.

Fig Ordnance Survey LVII.NW 1910

The subject building remains unaltered in the revised Ordance Survey map published 1930. The core building

group of the historic famstead appears unaltered although further expansion of detached buildings to the south

east are evident.


Fig Ordnance Survey LVII.NW 1931

The document Historic Farmsteads & Landscape Character in the High Weald AONB identifies the period between

1840 and 1870 as one of the most important phases of agricultural development in the Weald, which it describes

as the “High Farming years”, when “widespread adoption of improved grasses and winter feed-crops such as

turnips, accompanied by the production of good manure by livestock increasingly wintered in yards or buildings,

played a major role in boosting agricultural productivity”. This was reflected in farm building layout and design, with

developments in farming processes and mechanisation requiring new agricultural structures. The extent of the

change in the layout of the farmstead at Broomham between the 1840 tithe map and the 1870 OS edition can be

attributed to this resurgence in agricultural prosperity and the evolution in farming methods.

The farmstead has significance not only as a typical High Weald form but also as an example of agricultural development during the “High Farming” years. The fabric and aesthetic significance of the farmstead have been compromised by the loss of historic buildings and the construction of pre-designation mid-20th century building within the earlier plan form, which has an impact upon the wider landscape and the setting of Broomham House.


Fig View of Front Elevation (south west) and rear elevation (north east)

Wilton House Cottage is a 20th century addition to the earlier historic farmstead presumed to have supplemented the farming industry on the site and later the equestrian yard that is established in the buildings of the historic farmstead until it was subsequently sold off. The property historically was single storey linear timber-framed, clad in weatherboard on a brick plinth constructed in English bond all under a clay tiled roof. The materials and finishes reflect the local vernacular and give reference to the claddings and coverings of the stable building which forms part of the historic farmstead and is positioned to the west.


Fig View of Front Elevation (south west) in context, including modern stalls and historic stable block.

Within the domestic curtilage modern 20th century stalls associated with equestrian use are evident which form an extension to an earlier brick structure the south east. The stables, constructed in Flemish garden wall bond, sometime known as Sussex bond have been adapted and the height raised, evidensed by a brick on edge course, tile creasings and blockwork. It is entirely probable that the brick building had a pitched roof which has subsequently been replaced by a monopitch at some time in the twentieth century. The existing roof is clad with corrugate metal sheet.

In its converted state, 2no flat roof dormers, with false pitches have been inserted into the roof slope, whilst large domestic windows and sliding patio doors have been inserted into the front (southwest) and side (southeast) elevations. To the northwest elevation a range of modern timber sheds with pitched roofs covered with felt and a flat roof porch extension abut the building.

Fig View of North West Elevation within the curtilage of Broomham House

The rear elevation which forms part of the common boundary with Broomham House, has generally retained the simple utilitarian character which informs upon the historic use of the building.

The brick plinth to the front elevation has been substantially replaced with a plinth constructed in modern bricks laid in stretcher bond.


Fig Approach View showing context with Broomham House

Wilton House Cottage has lost its identity as a former agricultural building by way of overly domestic features and in particularly the visually dominant and disproportionate dormer windows within the roofscape which are considered to have a detrimental effect on the setting of the listed building, historic farmstead and in the wider context and sense of place.

Internally the layout has been compartmentalised to adapt to a domestic use although expectations of modern living are severely restricted by reduced head height which compromises the useable floor area, particularly at first floor level, and the ability to simply equip the upper floor with necessary furniture.

This former utilitarian building has been compromised internally and externally by adaptations imposed upon the traditional form which took place as part of the conversion works to residential to an extent where the significance of the asset is little more than group value in the context of the historic farmstead. The bulk and form of the existing flat roof dormer windows and the plethora of domestic fenestration have considerably impaired the ledgibility of the former function of the building, particularly to the front and approach elevation.

In its present form the modern intervention is considered to detract from the sense of place and in the wider context, the setting of the listed house and historic farmstead.

Proposals

This application seeks to improve the architectural appearance of the bungalow, raising the eaves and roof of the property by approximately 800mm. The increase will take the form of an extension to the timber-frame wallls, which will be clearly readable should the frame be exposed in the future thereby retaining and informing upon the morphology of the building. The increase in the height of the eaves will in turn lessen the mass and scale of the dormer window which is proposed to be retained.

Fig Comparative views As Exisitng and As Proposed, Sputh West (front) elevation

Addiitonally it is proposed to construct a one and half storey extension with central flat roof and sloping sides. The extent of flat roof has had to replicate the internal width of the large dormer window which it is proposed to replace to ensure sufficient width to accommodate landing and useable area within the bedroom. The first floor extension will improve the useable area of the first floor contained within the roof space. A Pre-application Enquiry was made to the Local Planning Authority reflecting the proposal on which this application is based, the informal response stated that the key issues for consideration were:

• “The impact of the proposal on the character and appearance of the existing building and locality:

• The impact of the proposal on the setting of the listed building

• The impact of the proposal on the living conditions of the neighbours”


The letter also states that: “The existing building, despite the somewhat unfortunate bulky dormer window extensions, is simple in its form, and retains a high degree of legibility as an early twentieth century outbuilding of single longitudinal range. The proposed provision of the large, deep plan and somewhat squat extension perpendicular to the existing range would detract from the simple form, character and legibility of this historic building.”

The deep plan of the extension has been determined by the internal dimension of the dormer window it will be replacing to retain the existing status quo in respect of top of stairs landing and bedroom. It is acknowledge that an extension of similar depth to the existing building would be better read in context, however the current bedroom area is sub-standard and any reduction in the depth would therefore compromise the top of stair landing making it impossible to access the first floor level from the existing staircase. Whilst the existing building is of linear type, there is clear evidence of L-shaped buildings within the historic farmstead (Stables, since extended / adapted to form an E shape plan form) that would give credence to the introduction of a range orientated at 90o and thus retain the context of a former outbuilding. The introduction of a central flat roofed area enables the area contained within the dormer to be retained whilst ensuring that the roof of the proposed extension remains sub-ordinate to the historic core. The visual subservience being clearly expressed on the front and both side elevations. Furthermore ”whilst the resulting footprint of Wilton House Cottage would appear to remain subservient to that of the adjoining listed building, given the close proximity I would be mindful of the effect that an increase in eaves and ridge height, and change to built form, would have on its setting.”

Broomham House is a two storey plus attic, timber-framed building with a 19th century north west wing. The mass, scale and plan form of the listed house is substantially greater than the proportions of Wilton House Cottage with proposed alterations. The listed property has further architectural merit depicted by the exposed timber-frame and a combination of plaster and herring-bone brick infill which makes a positive contribution to the sense of place, whilst the over-sized and visually disproportionate dormers windows visually detract from the approach vistas. It is considered therefore that not only would the resulting footprint remain subservient to that of the designated heritage asset, the mass and scale of the building as well as its architectural appearance and character would have a greater visual subservience in the setting of the listed building. improved by the removal of the imposing and disproportionate dormer and the screening of the second by a simply detailed extension to the south. Finally, “Given the close proximity of the building to the common boundary with Broomham House to the north-east, I would be concerned of the effect that the raising of the existing eaves and roof would have in terms of physical impact and in terms of overlooking from the introduction of new rooflights at first floor to the north-east elevation.”

The raising of the roof of Wilton House Cottage has been considered in accordace with BRE’s test to loss of daylight. The first rule, 25 o line, regarding directly facing windows is not applicable as Wilton House Cottage is located to the east of Broomham House, see Fig 13. Likewise the 45o rule usually applies the extensions on adjoined properties in line with one another; Broomham House is orientated at 90 o to Wilton House Cottage. The BRE recommned that no more than 40% of any private garden should be prevented from receiving any sun at all when the sun is at its equinox (ie 21st March), given the extent of private amenity space associated with Broomham House it is unlikely that the recommended figure would be exceeded, although a shadow plan has not been included within the supporting documentation.


Fig 13 Showing geographical position between Wilton House Cottage and Broomham House.

Regarding the second point which expresses concern regarding overlooking as a result of the introduction of rooflight to the rear roof slope. The rooflights are accomodated high up in the proposed raised slope, the floor to the upper level however remains as existing and as such will not provide any opportunity for overlooking.

Without visiting the site it is impossible to truly appreciate the restrictions of the existing first floor accomodation. As a means to establish the inadequacies of the current arrangement reference is made to the Technical Housing Standards, published by The Department for Communities and Local Government. This document sets out the national minimum requirement for new dwellings. Whilst this document cannot be applied retrospectively, the comparison between Wilton House Cottage and the space standards clearly illustrate the inadequacies of the current first floor.

Space Standard


a.

the dwelling provides at least the gross internal floor area and built-in storage area set out in Table 1 below

b. a dwelling with two or more bedspaces has at least one double (or twin) bedroom

c. in order to provide one bedspace, a single bedroom has a floor area of at least 7.5m2 and is at least 2.15m wide

Smallest Bedroom has an area of 10.44m2 however the width is 1.66m widening to 2.168m within the area of the dormer.

d. in order to provide two bedspaces, a double (or twin bedroom) has a floor area of at least 11.5m2

Bedroom 1 12.72m2

Bedroom 2 10.44m2

e. one double (or twin bedroom) is at least 2.75m wide and every other double (or twin) bedroom is at least 2.55m wide

Bedroom 1 1.66m widening to 2.11m within the dormer

Bedroom 2 1.66m wdening to 2.17m within the dormer

f. any area with a headroom of less than 1.5m is not counted within the Gross Internal Area unless used solely for storage (if the area under the stairs is to be used for storage, assume a general floor area of 1m2 within the Gross Internal Area)

Dimensions given in items c-e incorporate room areas with a minimum headroom of 1.5m as set out in the space standards

g. any other area that is used solely for storage and has a headroom of 900-1500mm (such as under eaves) is counted at 50% of its floor


area, and any area lower than 900mm is not counted at all.

h. a built-in wardrobe counts towards the Gross Internal Area and bedroom floor area requirements, but should not reduce the effective width of the room below the minimum widths set out above. The built-in area in excess of 0.72m2 in a double bedroom and 0.36m2 in a single bedroom counts towards the built -in storage requirement

i. the minimum floor to ceiling height is 2.3m for at least 75% of the Gross Internal Area

Floor to Ceiling height throughout the first floor is a maximum of 2.0m

Impact

The proposal has been designed to retain a simple utilitarian character indicative of the building’s original function and form; reducing the visual impact of the existing disproportionate dormer windows by increasing the eaves level and replacing the larger dormer with an extension that provides the same dimensions internally so as to preserve the function of the internal space.

The proposal is to carefully remove the existing roof timbers, setting aside the clay tiles for re-use, numbering the rafters, documenting their position within the construction prior to removal and carefully storing on site reandy for re-use. Where the timbers are deemed to be structurally impaired, they will be repaired by traditional splicing in techniques, strengthened by the introduction of a new timber member alongside, all to the agreement of the Local Planning Authority. Upon completion of the timber-frame section the roof construction will be reinstated at the higher level. The proposal will clearly read as an adaptation to the earlier building thereby adding a further layer to its morphology.

By raising the eaves height of the building, the proposed extension will allow the existing unaltered roof timbers to be re-used without any loss of historic fabric. Those previously truncated by the insertion of the larger dormer window, removed as part of the proposed works will, wherever possible, be re-used within the historic core of the building. All timber within the proposed extension will be deliberately sourced as new / seasoned to ensure readability of the earlier form and phased development of the building.

The proposals seek to retain and re-use historic fabric wherever possible thereby mitigating against any physical harm. Where roof timbers cannot be re-used in their original position, such as rafters previously truncated to allow the insertion of the existing dormers, they will be re-used within the historic core of the building. It is acknowledged that this will represent some loss and therefore harm, however that harm is cumulatively outweighed by the reduction in the bulk and scale of the dormer windows which detracts from the simple utilitarian character of the former agricultural building.

By increasing the wall height, it is considered that context is retained, providing clear readability to the later adaptation using new/seasoned timbers of a type to match existing. The reduction of the mass and scale of the retained dormer window and the replacement of the larger incongruous window with an extension designed to consider the simple architectural appearance and character of a utilitarian building is deemed to be an improvement to the existing form and thus enhances the setting of the listed house and the wider context of the historic farmstead.

The loss of the larger dormer necessitates a requirement under building regulations to enlarge the casement window to the south-east elevation so that it conforms as an egress window and allows sufficient natural ventilation and daylight into the first floor bedroom. The raising of the roof ensures that the enlarged double casement remains proportionate within the elevation. The proposal would be to retain the existing frame but relocate the existing studs to accommodate the enlarge width. This again would not constitute loss of fabric and as such would not amount to physical loss or harm. A barn hip has been introduced to lessen the verticality of the gable end to the approach façade, ensuring it remains subservient in context to the historic farmstead and the grade II listed house. This detail is indicative to historic farmsteads of the Weald and as such is considered to preserve the setting and therefore significance of the designated


heritage asset. The roof has been carefully detailed with exposed rafters and open eaves, again to reflect a more utilitarian detail so that it harmoniously blends with the appearance and character of the earlier farmstead buildings.

The proposed extension is, by virtue of the central flat roof, visually sub-ordinate to the original building. Whilst the roof form is not indicative of traditional buildings of the local vernacular, the depth of the extension has been determined by the requirement to retain the internal dimensions of the dormer thus ensuring the first floor remains workable and allows access to each of the existing bedrooms. The introduction of false pitched roof slope however will mitigate against some of the perceived harm. The extension will result in loss of historic fabric by way of the formation of a new opening between bedroom 2 and its proposed en-suite and the formed door opening between the proposed Bedroom 1 and the existing landing. The loss of fabric will be restricted to the removal of existing timber studs from the first floor level (which will remain extant) up to the former eaves level. However, these studs may be used to make good elements of the original frame upon removal of the dormer construction. Whilst these alterations may result in some harm, it is considered that the harm is outweighed by the removal of the larger overly dominant dormer and the reduction in scale and mass of the smaller which is to be retained

A simple plank door with full height glazed sidelight denotes the proposed front entrance, south east elevation, whilst still maintaining a simple design indicative of a former agricultural building, A small casement is proposed to provide natural light into the proposed cloakroom.

The existing low-grade flat roof porch to the north west is proposed to be renovated, cutting it back from the south west building line and incorporating a monopitch roof clad in traditional tiles. This proposal clearly defines the porch as a later addition to the building and thus contributes to readability of the building’s morphology. The existing upvc half glazed door which is inappropriate in the context of a former agricultural building is to be replaced with a simple plank door. This is considered to be an enhancement to the existing appearance and character of the building

The windows are proposed to be replaced with simple casement windows with no sub-division to the front and side elevations, thereby reducing the domestication of the fenestration. Where openings within the historic core have been enlarged to the south-east elevation, barn type shutters have been introduced which contribute to the readability of a utilitarian building.

To the rear elevation, it is proposed to insert 3no rooflights within the slope facing the listed building. The rooflights are to be metal conservation type that will be set between the rafters, sit flush with the slope and have a single vertical glazing bar. This will ensure that the proposal will not result in loss or physical harm to the historic fabric and will be read within the roof slope. The use of metal rooflights will ensure a high-quality design and finish in accordance with local and national policy. In addition, the existing window to the rear elevation will be reduced in height, retaining the upper section so as to ensure privacy for the occupant of the cottage and the amenity space of Broomham House. Finally, a new opening will be formed at high level to provide natural daylight into the core of the historic building. The window will take the form of 3no. casements which will be sized to fit between the existing timber studs, thereby ensuring no loss of historic fabric. The finished appearance of the casement will be informed by the timber-frame on site to ensure that the glazed proportions reflect the opening elsewhere in the property. The subject of sub-division could be agreed by way of condition.

Internally, the existing stairs have been reworked so that the winders are handed, descending into the lounge. The existing stairs are not original to the building, having been inserted at the time of conversion and as such are of no historic interest. By handing the bottom section of the staircase a high-level window can be inserted to provide natural daylight into the core of the historic building whilst protecting the private amenity space of Broomham House. In conjunction with the handing of the bottom section of stairs an opening will be formed in the existing partition between the lounge and dining room. Again, this wall is a later insertion contemporaneous with the building’s conversion and as such would not constitute loss of fabric or harm to the buildings context.

Currently the south west elevation marred by the formation of large domestic openings. It is proposed to infill the width of current window opening to the lounge on the south west elevation, extending it vertically to


form a door opening, making good the existing wall with materials and finishes to match existing. It should be noted that in this location the brickwork is laid in stretcher bond suggesting that this part of the building has undergone previous adaptation and as such the extent of historic fabric retained may have already been compromised. The existing patio door opening in the dining area is retained giving access to the extension beyond and as such it is considered that the proposed alterations to the former external wall of the historic building will be preserve the significance of the twentieth century outbuilding.

Generally, at ground floor the existing floor plan remains intact with the exception of a partition proposed to be removed forming a corridor linking the proposed utility room, lobby and kitchen. This partition however is likely to be modern and inserted as part of the conversion work. It is not considered to be of any architectural or historic interest. There is some loss of potential historic fabric within the proposed utility room however when considered cumulatively, the internal works are deemed to preserve the historic context and legibility of the building

It is proposed to reduce the opening between dining and lounge by way of timber stud partition and door. Internally any historic plan form or context has been lost in the conversion of the building to residential and as such the proposal are considered to preserve the significance of the former outbuilding.

The proposed extension will provide a formal entrance to the property, WC, home office and new staircase to the upper level which has been designed to allow furniture to be taken to the upper floor. The proposed extension also allows an extension to the dining area to form a family room. On the ground floor two sets of French doors lead out onto the newly created courtyard. The full height glazed doors are simply detailed to give reference to the earlier function and form of the historic building, their position and orientation ensuring no visual impact upon the significance of the designated heritage asset. The use of full height doors with no sub-division ensures a simple, utilitarian design which is greater refence to the earlier form than the insertion of visually domestic windows. The door openings are located on an elevation hidden from the east approach and because of the retained sheds to the north-west elevation and boundary fences obscured from the views within the curtilage of the listed house and historic farmstead. The openings are contained within the footprint of the proposed extension and as such will read as a further development to the historic building.

At first floor level, the extension provides a double bedroom which meets the requirements of the published space standards and en-suite facilities for this and the second bedroom in addition to the new staircase serving the principle bedroom. It has been designed to read as an extension to an outbuilding with conventional pitched roof, the flat area being deliberately laid to fall into the proposed courtyard which is considered to have the least impact upon either the historic farmstead or the setting of the listed building. Whilst it is considered that the form of the proposed extension does not reflect the proportions of the host building, the overall appearance and form of the addition improves the utilitarian context and legibility of the former outbuilding which has been harmed by the insertion of the incongruous and visually dominant flat roof dormers. Cumulatively it is considered on balance to retain the significance of the historic outbuilding and in the wider context, the setting of the designated heritage asset and historic farmstead.

Within the extension it is proposed to install a wood burning stove, the flue of which will be taken up the pitched roof of the addition by way of a stainless steel flue, powder-coated matt black. The use of such flues is considered in the context of former agricultural building to be in keeping with the utilitarian character and as such will preserve the significance of the heritage assets.

Below Ground Archaeology

The inspection hole was formed on the return elevation of the flat roof porch addition to ascertain depth of footing to existing building and nature of the ground sub-strate. Although it has been determined that bedrock is present approximately 450mm below ground level, it is possible that excavations for the foundations of the proposed extension may expose items of interest.

As the site is within an archaeological notification area there may be a wish by the County Council for a watching brief for the duration of the excavation works. This however could be subject to an appropriate condition.


Conclusion

As a 20th century addition to the historic farmstead, the significance of Wilton House Cottage is in its contextual value as a former agricultural building which informs upon the development of the farmstead of Broomham farm and its contribution to the setting of the designated heritage asset. In its current form, it has lost much of its architectural character and appearance and is considered to negatively impact upon the setting of Broomham House, the context of the historic farmstead and the wider landscape characterisation, particularly in the views from the east approach.

The proposals have been carefully considered to reinstate a simple utilitarian appearance which gives greater credence to its association with the historic farmstead and in doing so restore the visual context between listed house and outbuilding in accordance with local and national policy (and guidance).

In its current form, the cottage is unworkable as a family dwelling.

An extension to either side, suggested in the informal response by the Local Planning Authority, would elongate the linear form further and exacerbate the impracticalities of the building as a residential property, thereby leaving it vulnerable to loss of use. The location of a telegraph pole immediately adjacent to the existing lobby would inhibit any extension to the north west. In addition, it is considered that an extension in this location would have a greater impact upon Broomham House, with regards to loss of daylight and setting.

By enabling the eaves and roof to be raised by approximately 800mm, critical additional headroom and internal floor area is achieved in the first floor accommodation. The extension in the form proposed allows for the complete removal of the larger dormer window which is incongruous within the roof slope, overly domestic and disproportionate in mass and scale to the host building; visually detracting from the setting of the listed building and the readability of the historic building as a twentieth century addition to the 19th century farmstead.

The proposed increase in height of 800mm will not impact upon the legibility of the built form, the setting of designated heritage asset and/or the visual context of historic farmstead within the Combe Haven valley landscape, which forms part of the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The proposals have been developed ensuring due consideration to the significance of the building, its context and morphology. The proposals respect conservation principles and preserves the significance of the designated heritage asset. As such the proposed development is considered to be in compliance with the NPPF Chapter 12: Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment and Policies OSS4; General Development Considerations, EN1: Landscape Stewardship; EN2: Stewardship of the Historic Built Environment; EN3: Design Quality of the Local Plan.

Statement of Significance & Heritage Statement - Rother ...

Documents

Transcript of Statement of Significance & Heritage Statement - Rother ...