Ward: Upton

The Northern Team Leader said that the applicant had informed him that the proposed garage would be deleted from the scheme and that alternative storage would be provided for the tenant farmer. 

Having previously carried out a site inspection, the Sub-Committee considered details of the application and had a number of concerns.  There was debate about whether the building could be deemed redundant because the farmer used it to house calves, store potatoes or store wood at different times of the year and had said that at times it was heavily used.  The Sub-Committee shared the concerns of Councillor J Stone, the Local Ward Member, that the barn was set too close to other existing farm buildings and that because the barn was set in a working dairy farm complex, the conversion would have an adverse effect and that there were safety issues to consider.  Councillor Stone also had reservations about the overlooking of the other properties and disturbance that could be caused for the occupants of a new property on a busy farm.  He felt that the proposal would constitute over-development and that there were highway safety issues involved.

The Northern Team Leader said that Officers had revisited the site and had confirmed that the building was not being used for agricultural purposes but as a log store and the storage of non-agricultural items.  The applicants had made considerable efforts to comply with the requirements of the Officers and to make alternative provision for the farmer.  Notwithstanding these views the Sub-Committee felt that the application should be refused because of the reasons stated.  They had no objection to Listed Building consent being granted, however, so that the fabric of the building could be repaired as necessary.

RESOLVED:

            (i)    That in respect of planning application DCNC2005/1941/F the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to refuse the application because of the following reasons and any further reasons for refusal felt to be necessary by the Head of Planning Services, provided that the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee:

1.  it is considered that as the building still serves a useful agricultural purpose its conversion to residential use is contrary to Policy A60 of the Leominster District Local Plan, and Policy HBA13 of the deposit draft Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan

2.  It is considered that the location of the proposal within a working farmyard would result in an unacceptable level of amenity to occupiers of such a dwelling, and would result in unacceptable loss of privacy to occupiers of the adjoining farmhouse, contrary to Policy A54 of the Leominster District Local Plan and Policy H14 of the deposit draft Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan

(ii)            If the Head of Planning Services does not refer the application to the Planning Committee, Officers named in the Scheme of Delegation to Officers be instructed to refuse the application, subject to such reasons for refusal referred to above.

(iii)          That in respect of DCNC2005/1942/L, Listed Building Consent be granted subject to the following conditions.

1 -      C01 (Time limit for commencement (Listed Building Consent))

         Reason:  Required to be imposed by Section 18(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2 -    C13 (Repairs in situ )

            Reason: In order to preserve the integrity of the structure of the buildings, the conservation of which constitutes the reason for allowing the development where a new building would be contrary to policy.

3 - No development shall commence until details of the provisions to be made for an owl hole and nesting box/loft for barn owls together with details of the timing of the works have been submitted to and agreed in writing with the local planning authority. 

Reason: In order not to disturb or deter the nesting or roosting of barn owls which are a species protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.

Informative:

1.   N15 - Reason(s) for the Grant of PP/LBC/CAC

[Note: Following the vote on this application, the Development Control Manager advised that he would not refer the decision to the Head of Planning Services because the Sub-Committee had given adequate consideration to the policy issues involved].