Agenda item

Conversion and extension of outbuildings and stables to form 3 dwellings.

Public Participation:

Ms Ann Rudland spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Chris Hewlett spoke in objection to the application.

Ms Annie Griffiths spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Aaron Smith, Agent, spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Dominic Hughes of Chute Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr David Pike of Chute Forest Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

Objections included concerns regarding the increased number of car journeys the development would cause, car parking issues, lack of requirement for this type of housing, whether the proposal would comprise infill development, effect on heritage assets (including the adjacent grade II listed Lowerhouse Farm, the curtilage listed stable block and the Conservation Area); and impact on the AONB.  

Karen Guest, Development Management Team Leader, presented a report which recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions, for the proposed conversion and extension of the outbuildings on the site to create three new dwellings, including off road parking.

Photos and plans of the site and proposal were shown, including elevation drawings. Windows and doors would largely be inserted in existing openings, apart from some new roof lights. The elevations fronting the road would look the same apart from the new roof lights.

Key issues were stated to include the following; that the site was in the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and was in a Conservation Area; there was a grade II listed building adjacent and the stable block was considered to be curtilage listed. The principle of development was considered to be acceptable as the proposal was small scale, involving conversion and extension; and there were residential properties on either side. The property was Grade ll listed, however the proposal was felt to be sensitive to the character of the buildings and not deemed to cause harm to the designated heritage assets. Two parking spaces were to be provided per dwelling which reflected the adopted parking standards.

Attention was drawn to late correspondence, consisting of 12 objections to the proposal. These were summarised by the officer and included: overdevelopment of the site; visual impact; inappropriate ecology report; impact on the AONB; drainage; it not being infill development; and parking.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on whether all the bedrooms in the proposal were double bedrooms. The officer confirmed that they were.

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

The unitary division member, councillor Ian Blair-Pilling then spoke in objection to the application.

In response to public statements the officer confirmed that the stable block was considered to be a curtilage listed building.

A debate followed, whereby the key issues raised included; the lack of need for housing of this type in the area, affordable housing was needed which the proposed properties were not. Heritage concerns were also raised, including the size of the extension for Plot 2, which was felt to encroach upon the nearby listed farmhouse which would cause harm to its setting. There were concerns raised regarding parking, although it was acknowledged that the scheme met parking standards. It was stated that there may be increased vehicle journeys through the village. Due to a lack of services and public transport in the location, new residents would need to rely on cars. However it was also acknowledged that when the building was used as stables, there would have been have been traffic going to and from the location. Although most members were not opposed to the principle of residential development on the site, it was felt that the proposed scheme constituted overdevelopment and would harm the setting of the listed and curtilage listed buildings and the conservation area. Concerns were also raised that the outbuildings associated with Lowerhouse Farm would be lost.  It was not felt that the public benefit would outweigh the harm that would be caused to the heritage assets.

Councillor Ian Blair-Pilling proposed a motion to refuse planning permission, against the officer recommendation, due to harm that would be caused to  heritage assets. This was seconded by Councillor Richard Gamble.

At the conclusion of the debate it was;

Resolved:

To REFUSE planning permission, for the following reasons:

Plot 2, comprising the conversion and extension of the existing outbuilding, would be in close proximity to the adjacent grade II listed Lowerhouse Farm; would result in an overdevelopment of the site; and would result in the loss of dedicated outbuildings for use in association with Lowerhouse Farm. This would cause less than substantial harm to the significance of the adjacent grade II listed property and the curtilage listed stable block by compromising their settings; and to the character and appearance of the conservation area.  There are no public benefits which would outweigh that harm.  The proposal would therefore conflict with Core Policies 57 and 58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy and Section 16 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) of the National Planning Policy Framework, 2018.