Conversion of agricultural building to 1No. dwelling with associated internal and external alterations.
This application had been the subject of a site visit on the morning of the committee meeting. Cllr Pothecary was not at the site visit and did not take part in the debate and vote.
The report which sought conversion of agricultural building to 1 No dwelling with associated internal and external alterations was introduced by the Senior Planning Officer.
The agricultural building was a disused and II* listed barn.
The application complied with Policy SUS3 as a designated heritage asset suitable for conversion subject to site specific requirements.
The application which followed a recent refusal for the conversion of four barns and outbuildings was recommended with the application of a number of draconian conditions to include restrictions on the erection of fences, walls and sheds in order to maintain the openness of the space.
The Senior Planning Officer was confident that with those conditions imposed, the historic interest of the site could be maintained whilst conserving original features and making good use of the building.
The Transport Development Manager addressed the points raised in the report by the Parish Council. He felt that there was enough parking allocated for a dwelling of this size and as the vehicular access to the site was used for large agricultural vehicles the visibility splay on exiting the site was acceptable. Any parked cars on the C class road would also help to reduce the speed limit in the area, he therefore advised he could not sustain a refusal on Highways grounds.
Oral representation in objection to the proposal was received from Mrs J Read and Mrs J Witherden (on behalf of Yetminster Parish Council)
Their objections related to Highways safety issues in terms of the visibility splay for vehicles exiting the site onto the road where young children often rode ponies and bikes. The access track was not considered suitable for lorries or a fire engine to manoeuvre. The site was in a flood plain area which raised doubts to the suitability for residential accommodation and severing the buildings from the others on the site could fracture the historic element.
Mr R Anstis the agent for the applicant addressed the committee in support of the application
In response to member questions the Traffic Development Manager advised that in a residential property the number of vehicle movements would be approximately 6 to 8 a day between the hours of 7.00hrs to 19.00hrs, less than would be predicted for agricultural traffic (probably 2 movements a day).
Members were advised that conditions could be implemented to ensure that parking spaces were used and maintained. Conditions prohibiting domestic paraphernalia could be imposed to include caravans, mobile homes etc in order to maintain the open green swath.
The Senior Solicitor (Planning) suggested that it was within the gift of the committee to agree conditions that would restrict chattels etc, as long as it didn’t take away what the permission was granting, ie residential use.
In respect of condition 11 it was suggested that the word “within” was amended to “on” to ensure that boundaries were not put on a boundary and a condition added to include the management of surface water.
It was proposed by Cllr Penfold, seconded by Cllr Hall
That the application be deferred in order to obtain further details of the windows and doors as this was a sensitive site. There were also concerns about access and road safety.
On being put to the vote the proposal was LOST
It was proposed by Cllr Fry, seconded by Cllr Penfold
Decision: that the application be refused due to the over development of the site, loss of a heritage asset and open space together with the reasons outlined in the appendix to these minutes.