Demolition and rebuilding of a stone barn to incorporate a two bedroom bungalow for the use of a disabled person.

Demolition and rebuilding of a stone barn to incorporate a two bedroom bungalow for the use of a disabled person.

The Central Team Leader advised that, for clarity, the recommendation as detailed in the report should be divided into two separate reasons for refusal as the proposal would be contrary to South Herefordshire District Local Plan policies SH11 (Housing in the Countryside) and GD1 (General Development Criteria).

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr. Cook spoke on behalf of Little Dewchurch Parish Council and Mrs. Francis spoke in support of the application.

Councillor W.J.S. Thomas, the Local Ward Member, disagreed with the appraisal by officers and felt that planning permission should be granted.  He felt that weight should be given to a number of considerations, these included: the applicants’ health problems and the potential for this proposal to assist in their quality of life; the importance of farm diversification and how the bed and breakfast business ensured the viability of this farm; the view that the proposed bungalow would not have a significantly greater impact than that of the store building that it would replace; and the scattered nature of settlements in this part of the County meant that many were outside village envelopes.

The Central Team Leader stressed that Officers remained very sympathetic to the personal circumstances of the applicants but, nevertheless, had to ensure that proposals complied with established and adopted planning policy.  He advised that the proposal did not represent a conversion and had to be considered as a stand-alone new build.  In this respect, the principle of a new dwelling in this location was contrary to both national and local planning policy which sought to protect areas of open countryside.  Despite the offer of a unilateral undertaking to ensure that the building would be tied to the farmhouse and not sold separately, the material reasons put forward with the application did not outweigh the fundamental policy objections.

A number of Members spoke in support of the application and commented on the need for flexibility and awareness when considering such applications; some felt that the development plan should take local need into account in respect of small developments.

In response to questions by Members, the Central Team Leader advised that the application did not fully demonstrate why alternatives, such as conversion of the ground floor or extension to the farmhouse or conversion of a suitable building elsewhere, would not provide the type of accommodation required.

Councillor Thomas felt that the internal alterations to the farmhouse would not be suitable given the nature of the building and the need to retain the bed and breakfast facility, that a stair-lift would not resolve the situation given the personal circumstances of the applicants, that an extension would be detrimental to the character of the farmhouse and the conversion of another building further away would not provide the level of care required.  He believed this scheme to be the best option and that it should be supported.

The Chief Development Control Officer re-iterated that the scheme represented new build in open countryside and the reasons put forward did not carry sufficient weight to set aside the adopted policies in this case.

A number of Members felt that the exceptional circumstances of the applicants, the offer of a unilateral undertaking to restrict use and other reasons outlined in the application justified approval in this instance.

RESOLVED

That

(i)                 The Central Area Planning Sub-Committee is minded to approve the application, subject to the conditions 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:

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

(Note: The Chief Development Control Officer advised that, as the Central Area Planning Sub-Committee was minded to make a decision which was contrary to the Officer recommendation and which placed crucial policy issues at stake, he would refer the application to the Head of Planning Services.)