Issue - meetings

Change of use of flint barns to 3 no. residential units and replacement of existing agricultural buildings with 3 no. residential units.

Permit

Mr Power introduced the application.

Additional information was provided on the agenda update sheet a further condition regarding the removal of existing buildings on the site, and the summary of two letters of objection.

The following members of the public addressed the Committee:

Mr Timothy Russell – Parish Council

Mrs Gillian Nott – Objector

Mr Kris Mitra – Agent

Members sought clarification with regards to the number of proposed dwellings, the fall-back position relating to policy 46 and permitted development rights, vehicles movements likely to be generated in the absence of public transport, and whether landscaping would screen parked cars.  Members sought further clarification regarding car charging points, demolition times, potential CIL requirements, potential to control internal alterations and further permitted development rights and the threshold for the requirement of affordable houses.  Mr Power responded that the area on the plan within the red and blue lines were in the same ownership and with regards to the fall-back position, the site had two prior approvals, one for theAtcost shed to be converted to three dwellings and another for shed two to also be converted to three dwellings and under Class Q of the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) there is a maximum of five dwellings allowed solely under Class Q and therefore technically only one of the prior approvals could be implemented, hence the reason for having the fall-back position for three dwellings for plot numbers 4, 5 and 6.  This did not prevent six dwellings across the whole site to be permitted under two separate prior approvals.  Plot’s 1, 2 and 3 would be considered under policy 46 as conversions of existing buildings.  Mr Power summarised that were six dwellings on the site for the application, however only three were considered as part of fall-back and three as a conversion.   There are no controls over the highways movements for the existing use of the site.  Mr Power confirmed that six dwellings for the site, was not considered a significant increase compared to the existing agricultural use. A landscaping plan was provided early in the application process and small changes have been made to the layout of the proposal, with a reduction in the amount of car parking in the middle of site, and specifically changes to plot 4, and the layout also showed significant planting to the south and north side of site, and therefore a condition has been included, due the changes.  With regards to the charging points there would be one for each plot which could be confirmed by condition.  The floor-space in comparison to the fall-back position is just considering the Atcost shed which was approximately 510 square metres and plots 4, 5 and 6 was approximately 530 square metres, approximately 177 per plot, therefore there was a small but not significant increase.  Condition 20 would not control internal alteration but would control new windows, and given the eaves of the roof, it would not be possible to build another floor.   Mr Power confirmed that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25