Agenda item

To determine the application.

Tom Donnelly presented the report to members.

Members received a presentation, in accordance with the public participation procedure, from Shanna Penney, the agent. Ms Penney expressed the view that the application represents a sustainable and appropriate form of development contrary to the officer’s recommendation. She stated that the site benefits from extant Class Q prior approval for the conversion of an agricultural building into two dwellings, which, in her view, establishes a clear fallback position and this fallback is relevant as the current proposal also delivers two dwellings effectively achieving the same outcome and the principle of residential development is, therefore, already established, with this proposal provides a high quality replacement for the existing disused buildings.

Ms Penney expressed the opinion, in terms of visual amenity and landscape impact, the dwellings are well designed using timber cladding and slate roofs to respond to local distinctiveness and they are spaced thoughtfully with substantial separation to minimise visual impact and allow for wider views of the countryside. She feels this respects the aims of policies LP12 and LP16 which seek to the protect character of the countryside and provide high quality development.

Ms Penney expressed the view that by replacing redundant structures the development enhances the site’s setting without urbanising the open countryside. She feels it is important to note that there have been other residential approvals immediately to the south of the site demonstrating that development in this general location is considered acceptable and consistent with planning precedent.

Ms Penney expressed the opinion that the scheme passes the sequential test as it is effectively for replacement dwellings so no alternative sites need to be considered and the exceptions test can be passed by ensuring that the development is carried out to high levels of sustainable construction credentials. She feels that the proposal makes positive use of the site, delivers high quality homes, respects the rural character and is fully supported by the fallback position and local precedent and on this basis, in her view, the application should be approved.

Members asked questions of Ms Penney as follows:

·       Councillor Mrs French referred to the site history with there being four applications that were approved and asked why they have not already been built? Ms Penney responded that she believes it is a timing issue and now is the time to undertake it.

Members made comments, asked questions and received responses as follows:

·       Councillor Benney expressed the view that the officer’s recommendation is correct, he has visited the site, it is in the middle of nowhere and feels it is an application in the wrong place at the wrong time.

·       Councillor Marks expressed the view that it is strange that the applicant has not come back with a barn conversion as the site is in the middle of nowhere and he agrees that the officer’s recommendation is correct.

·       Councillor Mrs French stated that looking at the timing of the previous approvals she feels that one should still be in time so they could go ahead and build and do not need this application. Councillor Connor agreed they could commence the conversion, and they still have 6-7 months to start this.

Proposed by Councillor Mrs French, seconded by Councillor Murphy and agreed that the application be REFUSED as per officer’s recommendation.

(Councillors Mrs French and Purser registered, in accordance with Paragraph 14 of the Code of Conduct on Planning Matters, that they are members of March Town Council but take no part in planning)