Agenda item

The Planning Officer presented the report and outlined the reasons for refusal as outlined in the report.

The building is a former agricultural building converted sympathetically to be used as a holiday let.  The concerns about the impact of the extension on the character of the building were mentioned. Officers are also concerned about the views from the window of Bedroom 2 and the impact on the occupants of the neighbouring building.   It was mentioned that there could possibly be scope for this to be converted to an affordable housing dwelling, if justified, as opposed to an open market dwelling however this application is for an open market dwelling and a separate application would need to be submitted for an affordable housing dwelling with a S106 agreement.

The following spoke under the public participation at meetings scheme:

·         Andrew Dukesell – Agent

One solution discussed was moving the window on the second bedroom.  It was established that the distance between the properties was approximately 10 metres.  In this case the building has already been conserved by its use as a holiday let.  The extension is significantly altering the character of the farm building and is not appropriate to the surroundings.  The general consensus was that it would be preferable for this to be local needs housing.  There are other possibilities for extensions on this building.  Where there is an opportunity to move holiday accommodation to more permanent accommodation then this should be encouraged, however this proposed extension does not seem to fit in with the surrounding area.

The Officer recommendation to refuse the application was moved, seconded, put to the vote and carried.

RESOLVED:

That the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The proposed market dwelling is not required to achieve the conservation or enhancement of a valued vernacular or listed building and therefore is contrary in principle to Core Strategy policies DS1 and HC1.

2. The proposed extension would harm the character and appearance of the existing building and the local area contrary to Core Strategy policies GSP2, GSP3, L1 and L3, Development Management policies DMC3, DMC5 and DMC10 and the Authority’s adopted design guidance and conversions supplementary planning documents.

3. The proposed development would introduce a window facing the existing neighbouring dwelling house. Inter-visibility between these windows would result in harm to the residential amenity of the occupants of the neighbouring property and the proposed development contrary to Core Strategy policy GSP3 and Development Management policy DMC3.