Page 1 of 9

Committee Date: 08/08/2013 Application Number: 2013/03436/PA

Accepted: 22/05/2013 Application Type: Listed Building

Target Date: 17/07/2013

Ward: Shard End

Babbs Mill Cottage, Gressel Lane, Sheldon, Birmingham, B33 9UJ

Listed Building Consent for the erection of a two storey and single storey rear extension, single storey link to existing coach house, and external/internal alterations and repairs. Applicant: Mr Julian Lutak

Mill Cottage, Babbs Mill, Gressel Lane, Sheldon, Birmingham, B33 9UJ

Agent: John C Goom Architects 108 High Street, Evesham, Worcestershire, WR11 4EJ

Recommendation Approve Subject To Conditions 1. Proposal 1.1. Consent is sought for the erection of a two storey and single storey rear extension,

and a single storey link to an existing coach house, which would be renovated and refurbished in order to bring this currently disused detached structure in to a more practical use.

1.2. The proposed external/internal alterations and repairs include the replacement of

existing windows with new timber casement windows; removal of modern paint finish to external brickwork and brickwork made good; and two conservation roof lights inserted into the rear roof slope of the existing cottage. To the front elevation existing modern gates would be removed and a courtyard formed using traditional brick paving.

1.3. The two storey rear extension would be set in from the side boundary with the

adjacent property and would be 3.8m deep and 5.3m wide. The extension would have a catslide roof design that would slope down to single storey height adjacent to this boundary. The height of the ridge and eaves would be significantly lower than the main cottage.

1.4. Adjoined to this extension a flat roof single storey timber framed glazed link to the

existing coach house is proposed. This link structure would be set back 3.4m from the main front elevation of the cottage, and would have two plateau roof lights.

1.5. At ground floor the proposal would form a cloak room and kitchen, linking to the

coach house which would be refurbished to provide annexe bedroom and living room accommodation for an ambulant disabled person. At first floor level an existing bedroom would be converted to a bathroom, with the extension forming an additional bedroom.

Page 2 of 9

Proposed site plan Proposed ground floor plan Proposed 1st floor plan Proposed elevations

2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. Babbs Mill Cottage is a modest two storey red brick semi detached property with a

gable roof design. The property is a Grade II listed 18th century cottage, built adjacent to the larger Babbs Mill (also known as Kingshurst Mill). The Mill and cottage sit adjacent to the River Cole from which it drew its motive power during its operating life as a mill, and to the north of this is Cole Valley Nature Reserve Park. The surrounding area is designated Green Belt, and a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. Babbs Mill and cottage is also a site of Archaeological importance.

2.2. The application site forms a large plot with associated detached outbuildings within

the grounds, including a dilapidated single storey outbuilding/coach house located to the side of the cottage. The pair of cottages occupy an isolated position at the end of a long narrow entrance lane, which is accessed from Gressell Lane.

2.3. It is thought that during the mid to late 19th century to early 20th century a 2 storey

structure stood to the rear of Babbs Mill Cottage and remains of foundations still exist to accord with this theory. A sketch shows the structure clearly in place in 1850, and it is thought that this was removed between 1920 & 1940, which coincides with both properties being sold on and converted to cottages around the same time.

2.4. Babbs Mill is a larger cottage property, which has a higher roof line than Babbs Mill

Cottage. This property has been renovated and refurbished over recent years, incorporating a reconfigured internal layout. To the rear elevation, this property is set at a lower ground level in relation to Babbs Mill Cottage. The side boundary between the dwellings is defined by a 900mm high wall together with 2m high fencing above the height of this.

2.5. The nearest rear facing window is a high level ground floor window to a through

living room, which has the main window and source of light to the front elevation (the high level window had formerly provided light to a rear lobby/hall area with stairs access up to the first floor). The floor level of the living room is lower than the external ground level immediately adjacent to the rear facing window. The ground level has been lowered at some stage in order to address a damp problem, thus creating a sunken patio area. The main garden area to this neighbouring property is set at approx 900mm higher level to the patio.

Site location

3. Planning History 3.1. None.

Page 3 of 9

4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1. Adjoining neighbour, and local ward councillors notified. Site and press notice

displayed. Objections received from the occupiers of Babbs Mill, which have also been forwarded by Councillor Ian Ward who has requested that the application is reported to your committee for determination. This neighbour has raised objections on the following grounds : -

• Loss of light. • Increased traffic, and associated disturbance/traffic access problems. • The proposed development, and in particular the single storey link will be an

eyesore and will destroy the beautiful historic cottage and original setting of an old mill and cottage.

• Concerns that the building work may affect the structure of their cottage. • There is no concrete evidence that a two storey rear structure formerly existed to

the cottage (according to a local historian).

Society For The Protection of Ancient Buildings – No objections. Victorian Society; Council for British Archaeology; Georgian Group; The Ancient Monuments Society and 20th Century Society – no comments received.

5. Policy Context 5.1. The following local policies are applicable:

• Birmingham UDP 2005 • Draft Birmingham Development Plan. • Places For Living (Adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance 2001) • The 45 Degree Code (Adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance 1996) • Extending your Home (2007)

The following national policy is applicable:

• NPPF – National Planning Policy Framework (2012) 6. Planning Considerations 6.1. The application has been assessed against the objectives of the policies as set out

above. The proposal has been submitted following pre-application advice that was sought, and is in line with the informal officer guidance provided.

6.2. The principal matters for consideration are the scale, design and siting of the

proposed development and the impact on the architectural appearance of the Grade II Listed Building and the historic fabric and setting of the cottage and adjacent mill.

6.3. My conservation officer has no objections to the proposal subject to appropriate

conditions. The proposal will lead to the restoration and use of the coach house, which is currently in poor condition. The application will also ensure that the front elevation will be refurbished. The proposed extension will have a greater impact to the rear elevation than the front, however this impact would not cause substantial harm to the overall significance of the Grade II Listed Building. The extension and refurbishment of the outbuildings will provide an optimum viable use of the building as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Page 4 of 9

6.4. My Archaeologist has no objections subject to a condition requiring archaeological

observation and recording. 6.5. The proposed rear extension would sit approximately on the footprint of a previous

now demolished structure. With regards to the impact on the historic fabric of the building, the development will change the rear elevation of the cottage. However in the past the rear elevation has been visually affected by various alterations that have taken place. Whilst these illustrate the buildings development, I consider that the construction of the rear extension would not detrimentally affect the significance of the listed building. Some of the original rear wall elevation would still be visible, and the fabric of the wall itself would be retained. The construction of the ground floor link would have a very limited impact upon the fabric of the building.

6.6. The removal of the black paint from the external brickwork, and the positive impact

this has on the fabric and appearance of the building is welcomed. Likewise the removal of the poor quality modern timber windows and the restoration & re-use of the coach house outbuilding is also welcomed.

6.7. Turning to the scale, mass and design of the proposed development, I consider that

the proposed extension is subservient in scale to the main house. The proposed ridge and eaves are considerably lower than that to the main house. The first floor extension occupies approximately half of the width although this is exaggerated by the cat slide roof. The rear extension itself is of traditional design and is not excessive in size. The detail proposed is in keeping with the original features of the cottage.

6.8. The single storey link is more contemporary in design. This link is considerably set

back from the front elevation of both the cottage and the coach house, and from the proposed new rear extension. The use of timber and glazing will assist this element of the new build appear even more recessive.

6.9. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) provides clear advice as to how a

Local Planning Authority should deal with Listed Building applications. Paragraph 131 states: “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 vitality; and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness.

6.10. Paragraph 134 goes on to state “Where a development proposal will lead to less

than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing its optimum viable use.”

6.11. This proposal will lead to the restoration and use of the coach house which is

currently in poor condition. The application will also ensure that the front elevation will be refurbished. These aspects of the scheme will have a positive contribution upon the local character and distinctiveness. The proposed extensions will have only a very limited impact from the front elevation, and a more significant but acceptable impact from the rear. However I consider that this impact would not cause “substantial harm” to the overall significance of the listed building.

Page 5 of 9

6.12. Currently the cottage does not have a defined kitchen or bathroom. The extension will provide this modest cottage with an additional bedroom, allowing an existing bedroom to be converted to the cottage’s first bathroom. This and the refurbishment of the outbuildings provide an optimum viable use as defined in the NPPF.

6.13. I therefore consider that the proposed development would not compromise the

existing character or architectural features of the property, or have a detrimental impact on the setting of the two Grade II Listed cottages and the visual amenity of the surrounding area.

7. Conclusion 7.1. Notwithstanding the objections received from the neighbouring occupiers, I consider

that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the policies outlined above. As such the development would not cause sufficient detriment to warrant a refusal of the application.

8. Recommendation 8.1. Approve subject to the following conditions. 1 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans

2 Requires the prior submission of sample materials

3 Requires the prior submission of investigation for archaeological observation and

recording

4 Requires steps to be taken to protection of historical features

5 Requires any damage to the listed building to be made good

6 Requires details of protection works to listed Building features

7 Requires the prior submission of roof materials

8 Requires the prior submission of sample walling/render panel/stonework/brickwork

9 Requires the removal of brick pointing to be undertaken by hand tools only

10 Requires the prior submission of roof light details

11 Requires the prior submission of dormer window/window frame details

12 Requires the prior submission of external doors/garage doors

13 Requires the prior submission of fixtures and fittings details

14 Requires the prior submission of a schedule of existing and new internal joinery details

Page 6 of 9

15 Requires the prior submission of new walls, railings & gates & gate posts/piers details

16 Requires the prior submission of details of works to the existing surfaces

17 Limits the approval to 3 years (conservation/listed buildings consent) Reason for Approval 1 Birmingham City Council grants Listed Building Consent subject to the condition(s)

listed below (if appropriate). The reason for granting consent is because the development is in accordance with: Policy 3.25 of the Birmingham Unitary Development Plan 2005; the Birmingham Conservation Strategy 1999, which has been adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance; and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Case Officer: Zoe Langfield

Page 7 of 9

Photo(s)

Figure 1 Front elevation

Figure 2 Front view of coach house

Page 8 of 9

Figure 3 Rear elevation

Figure 4 Rear view from Babbs Mill

Page 9 of 9

Location Plan

This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010