Issue - meetings

Demolition of existing barn and pigsty replaced with 1 no. dwelling.

Permit

Mr Power introduced the application.

Further information was provided on the agenda update sheet detailing an additional condition in relation to the removal the existing building, and an amendment to an existing condition regarding legislation pertaining to not constructing a building or structure on the site without planning permission being granted. 

Mr Power also drew the Committee’s attention to the report and explained that an omission had occurred in regards to the recommendation which should read ‘Recommendation to permit with S106’.  As with the previous application, condition 8 required the addition of the words ‘until the’ to be inserted between the words ‘and’ and ‘car’ in the first sentence to read; ‘The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied unless and until the car charging points…..’

The following member of the public addressed the Committee:

Mr Adrian Hadland – Parish Council

Members commented upon the frustrations of parcels of land in unsustainable areas being used to construct dwellings and this application would not build on the original footprint of the current building, which would be demolished and not converted.  Mr Whitty responded that he understood Members frustrations, but on a point of clarification in relation to class Q, the Parish Council have previously been, and will continue to be, consulted on Class Q applications and the current application should be considered having regard to the permission for the conversion of the existing building to a single dwelling, afforded by the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order.  With regard to the Council’s upcoming guidance on determining Class Q Prior Approvals, legislation could not be changed or policy created, the guidance was to ensure consistency in these situations was applied. Class Q related to whether a building was capable of conversion without structural intervention and this had been proved in this application and was a material consideration.

Members sought clarification regarding the materials to be used, whether the buildings were currently for agricultural use, that in the previous item on the agenda  the conditions relating to hours of construction and deliveries were separate, but together on this application, whether there was a planting plan, whether the cross-hatched area was the amenity area and whether the building shown was on the 1990 permission and was used for storage.  Members sought further clarification regarding whether there would be permitted development rights for another agricultural building, for which a further application for conversion may be forthcoming at a future date.  Mr Power responded that the materials would include brick walls with a tiled roof, the buildings were considered to be in agricultural use when the class Q application was considered and during the officer’s site visit for the current application there was nothing to indicate otherwise. The previous item on the agenda was within a built-up residential area and in this instance the location was rural and therefore there was less opportunity for disturbance during construction and therefore the condition in relation to hours of construction was less prescriptive.  A landscaping plan was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24