Minutes:
89.1 Item 7C
Application DC/20/03328
Proposal Full Planning Application – Conversion of existing stable block to 1 No residential dwelling.
Site Location BAYLHAM – Land At, Nettlestead Road, Baylham
Applicant Mrs Charlotte Coathupe
89.1 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the access to the site, the existing buildings, the special landscape area, the RAMS zones, and the Officer recommendation for approval.
89.2 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: whether the site would be self-sufficient, whether the existing structure is redundant, and whether the stables required permission.
89.3 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative Keven Thomas who spoke against the application.
89.4 The Parish Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the demand for stables in the area.
89.5 Members considered representation from the Objector John Field who attended the meeting as a private citizen with a local interest and not in his role as a Councillor.
89.6 Members considered the representation from the Ward Member Councillor Mike Norris who spoke against the application.
89.7 Members debated issues including: whether the building was redundant, the sustainability of the location, whether it was possible to convert the building into a dwelling, and the use of the building being equestrian.
89.8 Councillor Andrew Stringer proposed that the application be refused for the reasons as follows:
1) The NPPF requires that planning decisions ensure development is visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping. This development would result in the creation of a residential property in an area remote from services and facilities where residential dwellings are unusual. The submitted design would introduce large amounts of glazing into an otherwise simple building and would also likely serve to introduce an area of domestic use and paraphernalia immediately surrounding the building. This would alter the appearance of the building and immediate area and character in a detrimental manner and would fail to achieve the aims of paragraph 127 of the NPPF and GP01, CL2 of the Local Plan and CS05 of the Core Strat.
Furthermore, it fails to meet the criteria of Para 79 of NPPF that seeks the avoidance of isolated homes unless “the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and enhance its immediate setting”. As it is not considered that this proposal would result in enhancement of its immediate setting given the intrusive residential/domestic use that is detrimental to the rural character the proposal is contrary to Para 79.
2) Notwithstanding the above, the proposal has not demonstrated the building to be capable of being converted into a new dwelling without being tantamount to being a new dwelling in the countryside. On this basis the development is considered to be an isolated new dwelling in the countryside contrary to Local Plan Policy H7, Core Strat CS1, CS2 and CS5 and furthermore this would be contrary to sustainable development principles including Para 79 outlined within the NPPF.
89.9 Councillor Andrew Mellen seconded the motion.
89.10 By a unanimous vote
89.11 It was RESOLVED: -
1) The NPPF requires that planning decisions ensure development is visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping. This development would result in the creation of a residential property in an area remote from services and facilities where residential dwellings are unusual. The submitted design would introduce large amounts of glazing into an otherwise simple building and would also likely serve to introduce an area of domestic use and paraphernalia immediately surrounding the building. This would alter the appearance of the building and immediate area and character in a detrimental manner and would fail to achieve the aims of paragraph 127 of the NPPF and GP01, CL2 of the Local Plan and CS05 of the Core Strat.
Furthermore, it fails to meet the criteria of Para 79 of NPPF that seeks the avoidance of isolated homes unless “the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and enhance its immediate setting”. As it is not considered that this proposal would result in enhancement of its immediate setting given the intrusive residential/domestic use that is detrimental to the rural character the proposal is contrary to Para 79.
2) Notwithstanding the above, the proposal has not demonstrated the building to be capable of being converted into a new dwelling without being tantamount to being a new dwelling in the countryside. On this basis the development is considered to be an isolated new dwelling in the countryside contrary to Local Plan Policy H7, Core Strat CS1, CS2 and CS5 and furthermore this would be contrary to sustainable development principles including Para 79 outlined within the NPPF.
Due to technical difficulties short breaks were taken between 13.06-13.07 and 13.12-13.14.
Supporting documents: