Agenda item

Retrospective application for the conversion and rebuild of barns to form a detached dwellinghouse and creation of a domestic curtilage (resubmission of PL/2024/03416).

Public Participation

Richard Cosker spoke in support of the application.

Kevin McQuaid spoke in support of the application.

Senior Planning Officer, Julie Mitchell presented a report which outlined the retrospective application for the conversion and rebuild of barns to form a detached dwellinghouse and creation of a domestic curtilage (resubmission of PL/2024/03416).

Details were provided of the site and issues raised by the proposals, including the background; principle of development visual, landscape and heritage impacts; residential amenity; highway safety and ecology.

The Senior Planning Officer noted that there had been an update in regard to the application and that a statement had been received from the applicant prior to the meeting regarding nutrient neutrality. Therefore, following discussions with an ecology officer ahead of the meeting, with delegation, officers would be able to consider planning and legal conditions in relation to this issue should the application be approved by Committee.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the application.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee as detailed above.

The Local Unitary Member, Cllr Chris Williams then spoke regarding the application. Cllr Williams raised the following points, which included but were not limited to that having spoken to both the planning officer and applicant he understood both viewpoints. Cllr Williams noted that he accepted that the application was slightly bigger than the previously agreed footprint however the buildings retained the same shape and perspectives. Reference was also drawn to how the previous buildings had not been in a fit state and were damaged before restoration work could commence. It was noted that the applicant should have made a new application on the collapse of the old building, however from a practical sense the building was more or less the same as the previous one and brought benefits.

The Senior Planning Officer was then provided an opportunity to respond to points that had been raised by public speakers and the Local Unitary Member. This included that on the previous application there had been no objection from highways as the conversion of the building over-ruled an objection for sustainability. It was however outlined that this application would not be a resubmission of the previous scheme and would technically be a new dwelling, therefore there would be a sustainability objection as a conversion had not taken place.

The officer also outlined that discussions had only taken place following enforcement investigation and that the building now stood substantially complete and that at the time, advice had been given in regard to internal adjustments to the property which had partially collapsed and the existing envelope and footprint rather than a new building. It was also outlined that the increased size of the property could be quantified as 136sqm and just under a 20% increase. Reference was also drawn to how following Cabinet Changes, mitigation credits needed to be purchased by developers in order to fund mitigation, however such credits are not provided to unplanned developments. Further acknowledgement was also given to the nutrient neutrality and how the applicant had given commitment to upgrading the existing package treatment plant as well as providing a new package treatment plant and that if accepted a bespoke assessment from Natural England and legal agreement would be required therefore removing this particular reason for refusal.

At the start of the debate a motion to ACCEPT the officer’s recommendation was moved by Cllr Philip Whitehead and seconded by Cllr Paul Oatway QPM.             

During the debate, issues were raised such as how older buildings provided difficulty in rebuilding with an example provided of how an old farm building had been dismantled, the materials cleaned and then reassembled in the exact format as the planning permission had outlined. A discussion took place regarding permitted development rights, with it noted that permitted development rights were only granted once a build had been completed and was fully lawful and that generally with barn conversions such rights were removed.

A point was raised about the materials used for the building, with it stated that permission was granted for the conversion of the previous building using the original materials, however this had not been done and now the Committee was considering permission for a different application with the building in question slightly bigger. It was also stated that the Council had processes in place for planning which in this case had either not been followed or ignored and that the decision made by the Committee should be based on that. Furthermore, it was suggested that there had been a clear disrespect to the local authority as well as a loss of heritage and building materials which could have been reused.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was, 

Resolved:

That the application be REFUSED planning permission for the following reason:

The development, as built, has amounted to the substantial demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a wholly new dwelling and garage on the site without reference to the original character, appearance and features of the non-designated heritage assets and without reusing the original fabric of the buildings which were previously permitted to be repaired and sympathetically converted. The site is located in the open countryside outside of any defined settlement boundary and in an unsustainable location where new residential development would not be permitted without exceptional justification and where no public transport or pedestrian facilities are available or accessible to future occupiers. As such, the development, if permitted, would result in a new dwelling in the countryside which would be wholly reliant upon the private car to access services and facilities for any residents and visitors to the dwelling, failing to comply with the exceptional circumstances contained in Core Policy 48 which allows for the re-use of existing buildings without substantial rebuilding and contrary to the settlement and delivery strategy for new housing and sustainability objectives embodied in Wiltshire Core Strategy Core Policies 1, 2, 4, 60 and 61 and the aims of sustainability embodied in the National Planning Policy Framework 2024 (with particular regards to Section 5, paragraphs 82 to 84 and Section 9, paragraphs 109, 110, 115 and 117) which collectively aim to provide housing in a sustainable manner and reduce the need to travel particularly by private car and encourage the use of sustainable transport alternatives.