# Low Flatt Farm, Heads Lane, Bolsterstone

- **Decision:** dismissed, 22 September 2026
- **Decided by:** Planning Inspector: Elaine Moulton
- **Authority:** Peak District National Park (Yorkshire and the Humber)
- **Appeal reference:** 6007476
- **Application reference:** NP/S/1025/1079
- **Procedure:** written-representations
- **Development:** Appeal against condition 3 of a s73 permission omitting a new ground-floor window in the south gable of a barn being converted to a residential annex
- **Site context:** national-park, open-countryside
- **Green Belt:** no
- **Framework applied:** August 2026 NPPF
- **Determinative policies:** HE7(2), N4
- **Development plan policies:** Peak District Conversion of Historic Buildings SPD
- **Main issues:** NDHA significance, National Park cultural heritage
- **Tags:** heritage-harm-decisive, ndha, national-park, disputed-conditions, section-73, transitional-no-consultation, alternatives-not-explored, n4-cultural-heritage

## Summary
An appeal to remove a condition that omitted one new ground-floor window from a permitted barn-to-annex conversion in the Peak District. Dismissed. The barn is a non-designated heritage asset (NDHA) of moderate local significance. The domestic-looking opening would cause harm to it that was "limited in extent". Combined with N4's substantial weight to National Park cultural heritage, that harm outweighed the limited benefits.

## Issues and findings
- **Transition.** Policy "has not significantly changed"; no further submissions sought (DL ¶2).
- **N4 cultural heritage.** N4 requires "substantial weight ... to conserving and enhancing wildlife and cultural heritage [in] National Parks" (DL ¶6). "Nevertheless, the importance of conserving cultural heritage is given substantial weight in the Framework" despite limited public visibility (DL ¶10).
- **NDHA — HE7(2).** "the proposed opening would erode the building's agricultural identity ... harm to the significance of the NDHA, although such harm would be limited in extent" (DL ¶9). HE7(2) balanced judgement (DL ¶13).
- **Benefits.** "it has not been demonstrated that the future conservation of the building depends upon the proposed opening. Nor has it been demonstrated that less harmful alternatives have been adequately explored" (DL ¶14). Benefits carried "only limited weight" (DL ¶15).

## Planning balance
HE7(2) balanced judgement, with N4's substantial weight to cultural heritage added in. Limited harm to an NDHA of moderate significance outweighed limited benefits.

## What made the difference
N4. Inside a National Park, the 2026 Framework gives substantial weight to cultural heritage, which lifts a small NDHA harm above the plain HE7(2) balance. The appellant also had no evidence that the room layout was forced by the building.

## Transferable points
- In Protected Landscapes, N4's substantial weight to "cultural heritage" applies to NDHAs as well as to landscape. A small NDHA harm can decide the case (DL ¶6, 10, 15).
- Harm to an NDHA does not depend on public visibility (DL ¶10).
- Arguments about daylight and amenity need evidence that the harmful layout is required by the building's constraints (DL ¶11).

## Policy findings
- **HE7(2): harm.** barn a NDHA of "moderate local significance"; new domestic-proportioned opening erodes agricultural identity; harm "limited in extent given the small scale"; balanced judgement per HE7(2) (DL 7-9, 13)
- **N4: harm (substantial weight).** "substantial weight should be placed on the importance of conserving ... cultural heritage" of National Parks; limited landscape visibility did not remove cultural-heritage harm (DL 6, 10, 15)
- **HE4(1)(a): neutral (limited weight).** benefits of securing the new use "only limited weight": no evidence the building is at risk or that the opening is needed for a viable conversion, and less harmful alternatives not explored (DL 11, 14-15); code mapped by harvester

## Key facts
- 19th-century gritstone barn attached to farmhouse, being converted to annex under a 2025 permission
- Without the opening, the lounge relies on two modest windows; layout not shown to be dictated by the building (DL 11)
- Parties not re-consulted on the 2026 Framework (DL 2)

## Sources
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/comment-planning-appeal/appeals/6007476
- https://appeal-planning-decision.service.gov.uk/published-document/b7cdf89c-368b-4d31-b7df-a21a02136c27

---

Source: https://planningdistilled.org/research/england/nppf-navigator/decisions/PINS-6007476.html

A summary of a public planning decision, written from the decision letter. Not legal advice. © Planning Distilled. Released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/): share and adapt freely, with credit to Planning Distilled. Quotations from decision letters, plans and the Framework remain the copyright of their publishers.