- Decision
- dismissed, 7 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: Vicky Simpson
- Authority
- Buckinghamshire (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6004673
- Application reference
- PL/25/5175/VRC
- Procedure
- written representations
- Development
- s73 plans variation (Appeal A) and listed building consent (Appeal B, 6004675) for refurbishment, glazed rear extension and link on Grade II farmhouse plus barn and granary conversions
- Site context
- green belt, listed building setting, open countryside
- Green Belt
- Yes (grey belt not argued)
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- HE6(1), HE6(3), HE6(4)
- Development plan policies
- Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 LB1, LB2, Chiltern Core Strategy 2011 CS20, Chalfont St Giles Neighbourhood Plan historic environment policy 1
- Main issues
- scope of s73; listed building
Summary
Revised schemes for a listed farmstead in the Buckinghamshire Green Belt, both non-determination appeals. The s73 appeal failed because the new link and first-floor corridor went beyond the operative part of the original permission. The listed building consent appeal failed on the HE6 balance. The harm to the farmhouse was "to a lower level within this category" but carried considerable importance and weight. The public benefits were discounted because they were unsecured, private, or achievable by less harmful means.
Issues and findings
- s73 scope. "a variation to the terms or extent of the 'operative' part of the planning permission would be required, which is not possible under Section 73" (DL ¶15). No other issues were considered for Appeal A (DL ¶16). The Green Belt issues were therefore never reached.
- Harm: HE6(1)/(3). "In line with policy HE6: 1. … substantial weight is given to the conservation of the Listed Buildings" (DL ¶30). "The harm … would be to a lower level within this category" (DL ¶31). The category is not named; this is the old less-than-substantial scale carried over. "In accordance with policy HE6: 3 … the harm … is attributed considerable importance and weight" (DL ¶32).
- Public benefits: HE6(4).
- Re-use of the farmhouse: "I have no reason to doubt that the building could be brought back into use with less harmful works … modest weight" (DL ¶34).
- Barn and granary re-use would "attract substantial weight", but "in the absence of a planning obligation or any suggested condition wording requiring a programme of works for the entire scheme … only a small amount of weight" (DL ¶35).
- Better living space "is a private rather than a public benefit" (DL ¶37).
- Fallback. The extant consent involves less demolition, so "the fallback scheme does not weigh in favour" (DL ¶41).
Planning balance
HE6(4). Considerable weight to low-level harm, against modest, small and very little weight to benefits. The benefits did not outweigh the harm.
What made the difference
The link and the glazed corridor caused new losses of historic fabric that the approved scheme avoided. Heritage benefits that depended on conversion works elsewhere on the site were not tied to the harmful works by an obligation or phasing condition.
Transferable points
- The HE6 sequence applied in order: (1) substantial weight to conservation → (3) considerable importance and weight to harm → (4) weigh against public benefits (DL ¶¶30–33).
- Inspectors still grade harm "within this category", keeping the less-than-substantial scale without the label (DL ¶31).
- Heritage benefits elsewhere on a site get little weight unless phasing is secured by obligation or condition (DL ¶35).
- A s73 cannot add elements outside the original description (Finney) (DL ¶¶13–15).
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| HE6(1) | harm | substantial | substantial weight to conservation of the three listed buildings (DL 30) |
| HE6(3) | harm | considerable | "to a lower level within this category": loss of historic chimney breast, rear wall and dormer fabric; glazed corridor erodes legibility of stacks (DL 23-27, 31-32) |
| HE6(4) | fail | re-use of farmhouse modest weight (less harmful works possible); barn and granary re-use would be substantial but only small weight as not secured by obligation or phasing condition; economic very little; better living conditions private benefit (DL 34-37) |
Key facts
- s73 appeal fails in limine; new link and first-floor extension fall outside the operative description (Finney v Welsh Ministers [2019] EWCA Civ 1868)
- Extant LBC fallback involves less demolition, so it does not weigh in favour (DL 41)
- Burnham Beeches SAC zone of influence; appropriate assessment not reached
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.