Agenda item

Erection of 2 x dwellings in lieu of 1 dwelling granted as part of the site’s re-development under application 17/00451/FUL (Retrospective)

Officers presented the application and explained the planning history of the site.  Planning permission had been granted in 2017 under application reference 17/00451/FUL for the conversion of former farm buildings into residential units.  That application included the demolition of a large dutch barn and its replacement with a single dwelling on the same footprint.

Works were commenced in 2020 but the dwelling constructed to replace the dutch barn was not in accordance with the approved plans, the building having been sub-divided to create two 2 bedroomed units instead of one 4 bedroomed unit.

Officers described the dwellings now in situ (and subject to this application) with reference to the slides in the presentation pack and referred to changes to the roof which had been built with a dual pitched roof instead of a flat roof.

The site was located in the Green Belt, and under the NPPF the dwellings would be classed as inappropriate development and the application did not fall into any of the exception categories.

Members were advised that with regard to application 17/00451/FUL, officers had found that very special circumstances applied in that the application would represent a visual improvement.

When assessing the impact on openness of the Green Belt of this application, officers noted that the dual pitched roof was higher than the flat roof under application 17/00451/FUL. However, the design of the revised roof was more in keeping with the location and remained considerably lower in height than the original dutch barn and officers considered that these factors amounted to very special circumstances.

In other aspects the scheme was very similar to that previously approved. The number of parking spaces would be increased from three to four and there were no objections from County Highways. The location was considered to be acceptable being within walking distance of local amenities.

It was noted that the Council could not demonstrate a five year housing land supply and members were referred to the presumption in favour of development and the test under paragraph 11(d)(ii) of the NPPF as set out on page 9 of the report.

NWMM had commented that on site drainage was acceptable although some further work was needed with regard to offsite drainage which was the subject of ongoing discussions between the developer and highways.

In light of the assessment that very special circumstances applied, and the addition of an extra dwelling to the housing stock, overall it was considered that the application was acceptable and officers were recommending approval.

At the invitation of the Chair the following speakers addressed the Committee, the first in objection to the application and the second in support: -

·       Mr Alan Smith – Chair of Feckenham Parish Council

·       Mr Ron McKie – on behalf of the applicant

The first public speaker highlighted that application 17/00451/FUL had only been part implemented by the applicant and questioned the comparisons made under this application to the dimensions of the now demolished dutch barn.  The speaker also questioned the weight which could be attached to the addition of a singe dwelling to the five-year housing land supply.

In response to questions from Members, officers confirmed that the works at the site had started during lockdown.  An application for planning permission had been made at the time but that the works had been continued pending the outcome of the planning application.  With regard to the permission under reference 17/00451/FUL, this had been implemented for the majority of the site subject to the deviation of the replacement building on the footprint of the Dutch barn.

In debating the application Members referred to the minimal differences between the current application and the single dwelling which was approved under reference 17/0045/FUL.

Legal advice was given that some of the issues raised in public speaking  regarding the implementation of the permission granted under reference 17/0045/FUL and the extent to which any deviation from that permission could be classed as “de minimis” would benefit from further investigation, and for that reason the recommended course of action would be for the application to be deferred.

RESOLVED that

the application be deferred to a future meeting of the Planning Committee to allow officers the opportunity to investigate issues raised in public speaking.