Appendix 1
Whippingham Church
proposed conservation area
draft character statement
The legal background
Section 69 of the
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 imposes a duty on
local planning authorities to designate as conservation areas any ‘areas of
special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which
it is desirable to preserve or enhance’. Section 69 also requires authorities
to review their areas from time to time to see if further designation or
alteration to existing designations is necessary.
Planning Policy
Guidance: Planning and the Historic Environment (PPG15) deals in some detail
with the assessment and designation of conservation areas in section 4, and the
adopted planning policy documents for the Island contain sections relating to
development within such areas.
Character
This small group appears very little influenced by
modern times, and could quite easily still exist in the Victorian era. It is an
enclave of peace and quiet, separated from the 21st century by a few
fields, and the buffer provided by those fields is vital to its existence. The
buildings themselves are individuals which adhere to a hierarchy relative to
their size, but follow no other rules.
NB this expression of
‘character’ is derived from the study below.
History of development
A church was noted in the Doomsday book but was
rebuilt by Nash in c1804. When Queen Victoria came to the Island the church was
partly dismantled and rebuilt to designs influenced by Prince Albert. The
almshouses were added to the group later during Queen Victoria’s reign.
Setting
The cluster is set between the A3021 Newport – East
Cowes road and the Medina River. There are views down to the river, but there
is no evidence of the main road either visually or aurally. The surroundings
are pure countryside giving the group a quiet and isolated feel, even though it
is so close to developed areas and a busy road.
Materials
The local stone was used for earlier structures
including boundary walls, and the church which, although having early origins,
has been much altered and rebuilt. The ‘Victorian’ buildings make use of bricks
made from local clay which are of a warm red colour. Roofs are either of slate
or clay tile.
Height, mass & form
The notable comment regarding height, mass and form in
this area is that there is absolutely no consistency. The characteristics of
each building relate to its place in the hierarchy of the group with the church
as the dominant feature.
Typical details
Again there is nothing which can be described
as typical in this area save for the ‘Victoriana’ and decorative ethic
associated with that period on those particular buildings. Overall the
buildings are reasonably true to the period from which they date, though some
modern insertions (plastic windows) have diluted the authenticity a little.
Paving
Informality, simplicity and the advance of grass sum
up the paved landscape here. The simple blacktop road is the major area of
paving, with its edges crumbling into grass verges. The almshouses have some
brick paths, but for the most part, paths are an original hard surface which
has been overtaken by grass.
Trees and open space
The area has plenty of mature trees both within and
around it, many of them set in ancient boundary hedges and banks. There are, of
course, yews in the churchyard. Open space flows through the area linking it to
the open country which surrounds it. The buildings are set in spacious plots,
well back from the road, so there is no sense of being in a village, simply of
passing through a group of buildings in the countryside.
Sound and smell
No smells have been associated with this area. In terms of sounds, the significant point is the silence. Birdsong and the occasional vehicle do interrupt the peace, but for such an accessible area, it is notably peaceful and quiet.
Appendix 2
Background
note re the draft CA boundary for Whippingham Church
The controls that come about when a conservation area
is designated relate to planning powers. They mean that express consent is
required for the demolition of buildings, and that works to trees must be
notified in advance. Where new development or change to existing buildings is
proposed within or adjacent to the area (setting), it means that care must be
taken to ensure that new work will either preserve or enhance the special
character of the area. Where proposals include the demolition of a building,
then that demolition has to be justified both in terms of why the building
can’t be kept, and how good the replacement building will be. Prior
notification of works to trees allows the Council to put a TPO in place if the
tree(s) in question is of sufficient quality and importance to the area.
Designation does not mean that development
cannot take place, either within the area or within its setting, but that special
consideration is required to ensure that any demolition is justified, and that
schemes which are acceptable on all other planning grounds are of a suitable
design and high enough standard to be acceptable. This additional level of
consideration allows Members to insist upon the best possible standards of
design for the Islands new developments, and allows them to refuse the poor and
mediocre with confidence.
The legislation also makes provision for schemes to
enhance the area, so the inclusion of areas of potential allows for schemes to
be put forward which will improve the area in keeping with its own individual
character to the same high standard.
In the case of Whippingham Church the reasons for the
proposed boundary being in the location shown on the map attached to the draft
character assessment are as follows :-
·
In terms of a
sense of place, the small group of buildings is quite compact and discreet.
·
The open
surroundings form a strong contrast to the built form and this element of the
setting has been identified as important to the character of the area.
·
Other
buildings in the area are separated from the group and from each other by open
fields and,
·
they do not
address the same focus as the identified group.
·
There may be
a case for a much larger and different kind of conservation area relating to
the buildings of the Osborne Estate, but this needs to be considered as part of
the Council’s overall review of its conservation area designations.
·
The ombudsman
requested that this area be reconsidered following previous acrimonious
exchanges on proposals to designate, and the boundary concerned at that time.
In this case the area was studied ‘cold’ with no previous knowledge of what had
gone before. The present proposal is put forward as a reasoned professional
recommendation, which has not been influenced by that which has gone before.
Appendix 3
Representation
received as a result of public consultation
NB The matter
was discussed with the County Archaeologist who did not wish to add anything to
the assessment of the area.
From
|
Comments
|
Response
|
The
Victorian Society
|
Feel that
the area proposed meets the criteria for designation and welcomes the
Council’s action.
They point
out an error in dating the almshouses in the draft statement.
They
suggest that more detail on each building would be helpful.
|
The
recommendation is in accordance with this comment.
This has been addressed in the version attached
to this report. Officers
have agreed that a schedule will be prepared noting each building, and that
this schedule will be available as an addition to the overall character
statement. As that schedule will be simply observed detail it is not
considered necessary for Members to approve it. If designation is approved,
the additional work will follow shortly. |
Mrs S
Weaver, 17 Crown Court, Cowes
|
Writes to
add her support to the conservation of the historic buildings of the island.
She regrets
that the area does not include fields and individual buildings along the
riverside.
|
Noted.
PPG15
notes at paragraph 4.2 that “It is the quality and interest of areas, rather
than that of individual buildings, which should be prime consideration in
identifying conservation areas.” |
Angela
Hewitt, Padmore Lodge, Beatrice Avenue, Whippingham
|
Notes that
the boundary now put forward differs from that previously suggested and
considers this a “flagrant act of maladministration”.
She lists 8 sites which she notes have been omitted of which she notes that 3 objected to the previous proposal. She
alleges misuse of section 69 of the Act on the ground that it only refers to
existing conservation areas. She
states that there is no reason to reduce the area proposed, and many reasons
to increase it. She proposes the inclusion of additional land up to and along
the A3021. She
notes that property belonging to previous objectors has been omitted and that
objection is not a good reason in law. She further suggests that the omission
of other properties, including her own, is as ‘payback’ for making a
complaint to the Ombudsman. She
considers that the original proposal should be considered and that in proposing
a different area, the Ombudsman’s recommendations are being ignored. She
alleges deception in that the map attached to the consultation “does not even
cover the areas you have left out” and
that “it does nothing to protect the setting of the village”. She
mentions development ‘threats’ and their impact on the “visual aspect”. She
states that in omitting the school, post office and Padmore House, the
historic importance of the area has been ignored. She
notes that she contacted HRH Prince Charles on the matter previously and that
he involved the Director of English Heritage. She
cites an interpretation of PPG15 in relation to available resources as a
negative angle to designation. She
advises that she is copying her letter to the Ombudsman and is considering a
further complaint. |
See the
bullet points in appendix 2 in relation to the reasons for the boundary
location. In terms of alleged maladministration, advice has been sought from
the relevant Council departments before submission of this report to Members.
See the final bullet point of appendic 2 in
relation to the assessment being made without previous knowledge. See the quotation from the Act at section 2 of
this report. Section 69 (1) refers here, section 69 (2) deals with the review
of existing conservation areas. See the bullet points in appendix 2 in relation
to the reasons for the boundary location, and in particular the penultimate
point which raises the possible consideration of an ‘Osborne Estate’
conservation area as part of the overall review of designations. See
the bullet points in appendix 2 in relation to the reasons for the boundary
location, and the assessment being made without previous knowledge. No
maladministration was found previously, though the Councils Head of Planning
Services did agree to review the matter. The
map used for the consultation, and for this report, clearly shows the area on
which comments were being sought in its context. It was a clearly printed
extract from the OS. The
effect on the setting of a conservation area is a material consideration. The
effect on the setting of a conservation area is a material consideration. PPG15 notes at paragraph 4.2 that “It is the
quality and interest of areas, rather than that of individual buildings,
which should be prime consideration in identifying conservation areas.” See
also the bullet points in appendix 2
in relation to the reasons for the boundary location, and in particular the
penultimate point which raises the possible consideration of an ‘Osborne
Estate’ conservation area as part of the overall review of designations. English Heritage was consulted as noted in
section 5 of this report. At the time of writing no comments have been
received from them. Resources have been considered and the
recommendation here is in favour of designation. Noted. |