Download View Officer Report - Planning Portal

Reference number:
R16/1052
Site address:
Kilbracken House, 9 Barby Road, Rugby, CV22 5DX
Description :
Listed Building Consent for the demolition of a single storey extension.
Case Officer Name & Number:
Paul Varnish 01788 533771
Relevant decisions
11417 – Brick Garage – Building Control – 16/03/59
R83/1697/13923/P – Single storey side extension – Approved – 19/03/84
R83/1781/13923/LB – Demolition of single garage, construction of single storey pitched roof
extension – Approved – 05/04/84
R84/0473/13923/B – Erection of new kitchen to private side – Building Control 17/07/84
R91/0544/13923/P – Widening of existing access – Approved – 23/08/91
R91/0906/13923/LB - Widening of existing access – Approved – 23/10/91
R94/0225/13923/LB – Demolition of existing boundary wall & reconstruction of boundary wall –
Approved – 10/05/94
R94/0225/13923/LB - Demolition of existing boundary wall & reconstruction of boundary wall –
Approved –06/05/94
R00/0444/13923/P – Erection of fence 2m high to Southern Boundary – Approved – 14/07/00
Technical Consultations
WCC Ecology – No objection, subject to informatives.
Historic England – Specialist staff have considered the information received and Historic
England do not wish to offer any comments on this occasion - This application should be
determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your
expert conservation advice.
Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings – No response
Ancient Monuments Society – No response
Council for British Archaeology – No response
Georgian Group – No response
Victorian Society – No response
Twentieth Century Society - No response
Archaeology – 1) Will undertake a more detailed assessment 2) Archaeology have undertaken
a detailed assessment for this application and have concluded that it is unlikely to have a
significant archaeological impact. Therefore have no archaeological comments to make on this
application.
Third Party Consultations
Neighbours – No responses.
Other relevant information
Kilbracken House is located within the designated Rugby School Conservation Area and is set
back from Barby Road, within a landscaped setting. Towards the South of the site is the
Hospital of St Cross and to the North is a playing field. The Kilbracken House is Grade II Listed
and is an example of a Gothic Butterfield Design from 1865, with red brick and black brick
diapering with stone dressings under a gabled tile roof. The building is two and three storeys
with sash windows and gable windows under shouldered heads
Report Sheet
In terms of the built environment, within the RSCAA, the site is allocated under the Area 1 sub
area, which includes Rugby School, Oak Street and Barby Road. The character of the sub area
is described as being large school buildings of individual character and design and includes to
the North and North West of the site, a number of important unlisted buildings and South West
of the site Listed Buildings.
Summary of the proposal
The proposal consists of a planning permission for Listed Building Consent for the demolition of
a single storey extension. The extension was built circa 1941 and is mainly constructed of red
brick in a Flemish bond, with a more modern red brick on the inside of the extension and a
concrete roof. The extension is in two sections: the section nearest to Kilbracken House is 2.1
metres in width, by 2.25 metres in length and 2.15 metres in height. This section has a small
opening which would have previously being a single doorway and a large opening, which would
have had a set of wooden double doors (currently stored in the section section). The second
section is 3 metres in width, by 1.9 metres in length and 2.15 metres in height and is enclosed,
with a single wooden door to the front. The second section has three openings, which would
have been windows, but is now blocked up with airbricks. The extension is flat roofed with
coping stone surround and a sloping, curved coping stone to the principle elevation, which is
considered to be of noteworthy character.
The first section of the extension is currently used as an access way, with the second section
being used as a smoking shelter.
Planning Policy Guidance
Rugby Borough Council Local Plan, 2006 Saved Policies:
E6 – Biodiversity - Complies
Rugby Borough Core Strategy 2011:
CS16 - Sustainable Design - Complies
National Planning Policy Framework, 2012
Rugby School Conservation Area Appraisal, 2010
Determining Considerations
Policy CS16 states that particular emphasis is placed on retaining the identity, appearance and
character of a Conservation Area or a Listed Building.
The NPPF, in Section 12 highlights the importance of conserving and enhancing the historic
environment, in particular the significance of any heritage asset or the setting of a heritage
asset that may be affected by a proposal.
The main issues to assess, in relation to this application, are the potential impact of the
demolition of the single storey extension on the character, appearance and setting of the Listed
Buildings and Conservation Area.
Principle of the proposed demolition.
The NPPF within paragraph 128 advises that an applicant should provide a Heritage Statement,
in regards to the significance of the proposal. However, it also advises that the Heritage
Statement will only be proportionate to the assets’ importance and no more than is sufficient to
understand the potential impact. It is considered that the extension is a small later addition to
the main Listed Building, with the plans clearly showing what is to be demolished. As the
information submitted is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the demolition it has
been deemed not to be necessary for the applicant to provide a Heritage Statement.
Report Sheet
According to the NPPF when considering the impact of a proposed development on the
significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s
conservation. The extension is an addition that fronts a principle elevation of the Grade II Listed
Building and therefore the proposed demolition would be considered harmful. The NPPF, within
Paragraph 132, recognises that heritage assets are irreplaceable, and any harm or loss should
require clear and convincing justification.
According to the application form the extension was built in circa 1941. It is recognised that
there are similarities with the main property and the extension, with the extension being red
brick in a Flemish bond. However, there are also contrasting elements, including the concrete
roof, with stone coping and a more modern brick been used within the construction of the
internal walls. It is also recognised that there is a clear distinction between the extension and
the original principle elevation of Kilbracken House. Therefore, it is considered the extension
does not contribute to the character and distinctiveness of Kilbracken House. Moreover, the
removal of the extension would reinstate the property to its original form and would allow the
principle façade to be viewed in its entirety, thereby enhancing the heritage asset.
In terms of the setting of the Listed Building and the setting of the Conservation Area, the
extension is prominent and visible from the highway and due to being on the edge of a playing
field, from other areas of the school grounds. Therefore, the demolition of the extension would
see the removal of a prominent extension, with the full façade of the Kilbracken House being
reinstated and fully visible, which would enhance the setting of the Listed Building and the
setting of the Conservation Area.
In terms of the use of the building, it is difficult to understand the purpose for what the building
was constructed for, although the current use is as an access way and a smoking shelter.
Therefore, the demolition would not remove a part of the building which provides a viable use,
or could provide a viable use.
It is therefore considered the proposal would provide convincing justification for demolition and
accords with the NPPF and policy CS16 of the Rugby Borough Core Strategy 2011and the SDP
– Sustainable Design and Construction supplementary planning document.
Ecological Considerations
WCC Ecology have no objection subject to informatives and therefore it is considered the
proposal will not have an adverse impact on protected species in accordance with saved policy
E6.
Highway safety and Car parking
Not applicable
Report prepared by: Paul Varnish
Report Sheet