Agenda item - 22/01137/S73 - Removal of Condition 3 (Permitted Development Rights) and Variation of Condition 6 (Conservation Rooflights) of Planning Approval 21/01248/FUL Single Storey Side Extension - The Barn, Woodman Lane, Clent, Stourbridge, Worcestershire DY9 9PX - Ms. J. Willetts

Agenda item

22/01137/S73 - Removal of Condition 3 (Permitted Development Rights) and Variation of Condition 6 (Conservation Rooflights) of Planning Approval 21/01248/FUL Single Storey Side Extension - The Barn, Woodman Lane, Clent, Stourbridge, Worcestershire DY9 9PX - Ms. J. Willetts

Minutes:

Prior to the consideration of this item, the meeting stood adjourned from 18:35 pm. to 18:37 p.m. whilst Councillor A. D. Kriss took a comfort break.

 

Officers presented the report and presentation slides, as detailed on pages 61 to 71 of the main agenda report; and in doing so, highlighted that this was an application for the removal of Condition 3, Permitted Development Rights and a variation of Condition 6, Conservation Rooflights of Planning Application 21/01248/FUL single storey side extension.

 

Officers provided additional slides (photographs) at the request of the Applicant.

 

Officers drew Members’ attention to the Location Plan and Aerial View slide, as detailed on page 62 of the main agenda report.

 

Officers highlighted that the Barn was originally granted permission for conversion into a dwelling in 1975.  At this stage, Permitted Development Rights were not removed. 

 

After the initial conversion an application for a bedroom and bathroom extension was subsequently approved in 1981, but again this pre-dated the current guidance and therefore PD Rights remained intact. This was followed by approval in November 2021 under reference 21/01248/FUL for a single storey side extension, whereby it was considered that in order for the extension to be acceptable in planning terms, certain permitted development rights needed to be removed and that in accordance with Paragraph 54 of the NPPF, there was a clear reason to do so.

 

Whilst the applicant had suggested that the removal of permitted development rights was unreasonable, as detailed on page 49 of the main agenda report, the LPA considered that the site-specific circumstances in this case warranted the condition to be retained. The implementation of these permitted development rights, without careful control, could harm the visual amenity of the area. Furthermore, it could harm the openness of the Green Belt.

 

Officers drew Members’ attention to the comments received from the Conservation Officer, as detailed on page 47 of the main agenda report.

 

At the invitation of the Chairman, Ms. J. Willetts, the Applicant, addressed the Committee.

 

Members then considered the application, which officers had recommended that planning permission be refused.

 

Members referred to the comments received from the Conservation Officer with regard to the rooflights and that top hung rooflights were more suitable to preserving the appearance of a converted agricultural building. Members commented that the barn was well set back from Woodman Lane and that no representations had been received from any nearby neighbours.

 

At the request of the Committee, officers referred to the Rooflight Images slide, as detailed on page 71of the main agenda report.

 

Some Members further commented that they were in agreement with the Applicant, that the new rooflights should match the existing rooflights. Councillor A. D. Kriss further added that he had conducted a site visit and had noticed that you could see all the rooflights which were quite predominate, so he could see why different rooflights would look odd.  He was aware that the barn was a Non-Designated Heritage Asset; but felt that it should be seen to be in keeping with the existing building.  He would agree with the Conservation Officer if the building was a Grade II listed building.

 

In response to questions from Members with regard to voting on each Condition separately, Officers clarified that the application required Members to make one decision only.

 

Members further debated the removal of Condition 3, Permitted Development Rights.  Officers further reiterated that by reinstating permitted development rights further work could be carried out. Officers reminded the Committee that, currently the Barn had reached its upper limit of proportionate additions in an overall percentage increase of 33.63% over and above the original, which was close to the 40% upper limit in the Green Belt.

 

Councillor G. N. Denaro proposed an Alternative Recommendation, seconded by Councillor A. D. Kriss, that planning permission be granted.

 

On being put to the vote it was

 

RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the Conditions which must be complied with, to be set out in the Grant of Section 73 Planning Permission Decision Notice.

Supporting documents: