Agenda item

Application Proposal: The conversion and extension of an existing agricultural shed into 2 semi-detached dwellings

The Specialist - Principal Planner presented the application as detailed in the agenda, and with the aid of a powerpoint presentation, continued to show the site and proposed plans.  He advised that there was an existing stone agricultural building on site currently used for agricultural storage and that the application proposed to construct two dwellings over that footprint and to use part of the paddock to create two garden areas.  He outlined the key considerations which were class q and fall-back position, scale of development, local associations and accessibility to services and facilities.  The Planning Officer recommended that the application be refused. 

In response to various questions, the Specialist – Principal Planner informed members of the following:

·         There would be new upper floors across the entire structure.

·         Some of the walls could be retained although it was likely to be more of a new build rather than a conversion.

·         The rule of thumb for walkability to facilities was 400 metres.

·         Some of the materials could be retained but there would also be a lot of new material because of the scale of the structures being created.

·         It was confirmed that a condition could be attached to retain some of the materials.

·         The Manor Farm site was currently under construction and delivered a heritage benefit with a mix of units including holiday units and new builds.

·         The bus service (bus stop outside the Manor Farm scheme) provided an opportunity to use an alternative mode of transport.

·         There would be a need to rely on the use of a car to access facilities.

·         There were no issues with the application in terms of landscape.

·         Class Q could be a fall back but there would need to be evidence that it would be implemented and some reason why the alternative was a better outcome.

·         The application was not considered to be an exceptional dwelling in the countryside.  It was a pair of dwellings proposed to sit in a rural location and was a familiar design.

The Committee was addressed by one of the joint applicants.  He referred to his family ties to Forton and explained some of his family history.  The application was to build two four bedroom homes for their families and the proposal was the only viable option as prices for new houses in the village and beyond were out of price range.  The size and scale of the buildings were no larger than the houses granted at Manor Farm 200 yards away which it was felt had already set a precedent and there were many other houses of a similar size in the village.  The design made use of the existing features of the barn and the dwellings would be fit for purpose and futureproof.  The dwellings would be made as sustainable as possible with the use of photovoltaics and air source pumps using local tradesmen.  The Parish Council were in support of the proposal and there were no letters of objection.  In building two larger homes, two smaller affordable properties would be available helping sustainability within the village.  The applicant concluded by confirming that the building would be kept in its entirety with the end walls being knocked out slightly and the raising of the roof.

Ward Member, Councillor Jenny Kenton stated that Forton was a hamlet that formed part of the Blackdown, Tatworth and Forton ward but was closer to Chard than it was to Tatworth.  A lot of the Chard Eastern Development Area would cut through the hamlet from the B1362 to the A30 along the Crewkerne Road and the first house in Forton was next to the last house in Jocelyn ward in Chard.  She said that the applicants had links to the village of Forton which span over 200 years and took an active part in the local community.  The village of Forton fell within the parish of Tatworth and Forton which had a pub, shop, post office and school.  It was not a remote location and a precedent had already been set by building at Manor Farm and Whatley.  There were no objections from the parish council and letters of support had been received.  The Council was currently unable to demonstrate a 5 year land supply and the family had a history of building beautiful houses that blended into the landscape.

The other Ward Member, Councillor Martin Wale said that from standing in the paddock you would see various housing developments that had been constructed over many centuries.  There was a listed building further up the road, a converted farmhouse which was part of the family plot and a 1950’s bungalow.  The development was considered to be part of the village and within a quarter of a mile of the Chard Eastern Development site.  It was also felt that the development was not overbearing and would not impinge on any other properties.

During the discussion, some members expressed their support for the application and the comments made by the ward members and did not agree with the reasons for refusal.  It was felt that the proposed dwellings were surrounded by other properties within the village and were not considered to be located in open countryside.  One member supported the use of existing materials as confirmed by the applicant.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed and seconded to approve the application contrary to the Planning Officer’s recommendations for the following reason as suggested by the Specialist – Principal Planner:

The location is considered to be accessible to community infrastructure and public transport to comply with the provisions of Local Plan Policy SS2. The development itself is well related to the settlement and would not adversely impact upon the landscape character.

A vote was taken and members unanimously approved the application.

Members indicated that they were in agreement with the following conditions as suggested by the Specialist – Principal Planner:

1.   Standard time

2.   Approved plans

3.   Materials approval together with use of existing materials in the finished development

4.   Landscape plan and boundary treatments

5.   Provision of Electric Vehicle charging point

6.   Provision of badger mitigation

7.   Provision of bat / bird boxes

8.   Lighting scheme

9.   Removal of Permitted Development for extensions / alterations to the dwellings