Agenda item

Report No: DEV/FH/16/014

Change of use of existing redundant gymnasium building to 15 dwellings (3 x one-bedroom apartments, 6 x two-bedroom apartments,6 x three-bedroom apartments), residential office unit, new residential gym facility and ancillary works.

Planning Application DC/15/0802/FUL - Change of use of existing redundant gymnasium building to 15 dwellings (3 x one-bedroom apartments, 6 x two-bedroom apartments,6 x three-bedroom apartments), residential office unit, new residential gym facility and ancillary works.

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee due to its complex nature which raised District wide planning policy issues.

Officers were recommending that the application be refused for the reasons set out in Paragraph 177 of Report No DEV/FH/16/014.  A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer – Major Projects advised the Committee that one further letter of representation had been received since publication of the agenda, from a resident of Herringswell who objected to the scheme on grounds of highway safety and unsuitability of the location.

Members were also advised of an error in Recommendation 1 (Paragraph 177), in that the policy referred to as DM23 should read DM33.

Lastly, for the benefit of all Members, the Officer summarised the lengthy and complex planning history associated with the site.

It was moved by Councillor David Bowman that the application be refused as per the Officer recommendation and this was duly seconded by Councillor Carol Lynch.

With 8 voting for the motion, 2 against and with 1 abstention it was resolved that:

The application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.   The site falls within the Countryside as defined by Policy CS1 of the Forest Heath Core Strategy (May 2010), and is some distance from the small settlement of Herringswell which is classified as a small settlement which is not capable of sustaining further growth.  Policies DM28 and DM33 of the Forest Heath and St Edmundsbury Local Plan Joint Development Management Policies Document (February 2015) allow the residential conversion of redundant buildings in the Countryside.  These policies require buildings to be structurally sound and capable of conversion without the need for extension, significant alteration or reconstruction.  They also require development proposals to be of a high design quality which leads to an enhancement of the immediate setting of the building. 

The existing structural framework of the barn does not appear substantial enough to be capable of residential conversion without a significant degree of physical works.  In addition, the proposed works are not considered to enhance the immediate setting of the building, and would have an adverse impact on the character of the site and its surrounding area by reason of the creation of a residential curtilage. 

The Local Planning Authority considers the dis-benefits of this development would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, such that the development is not sustainable development (as defined by the policies of the NPPF taken as a whole).

2.   Policy CS13 of the Core Strategy (2010) and saved Policy 14.1 of the Forest Heath Local Plan (1995) require proposals for new development to demonstrate it will not be harmful to, inter alia, educational attainment, services and health and confirms that arrangements for the provision or improvement of infrastructure to the required standards will be secured by planning obligation. The following policy compliant package of infrastructure improvements are required to mitigate the impacts of this development:

·         Developer contributions towards extending the catchment primary school.

·         Developer contributions towards early years education.

·         Developer contribution towards the provision of library facilities.

·         Developer contribution towards bus stop improvements.

No mechanism is in place to secure the required package of mitigation measures arising from this development and, in the absence of appropriate mitigation the development would have significantly adverse impacts upon the delivery of infrastructure necessary to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development, further reducing its sustainability credentials. The proposals are therefore also contrary to the Framework and the aforementioned Development Plan policies in this respect.

Speakers:    Mr Geoff Yeates (resident) spoke against the application.

                   Mr Samuel Brampton (applicant) spoke in support of the                     application.

On conclusion of this item the Chairman advised all present that this was to be the last Development Control Committee for the Principal Planning Officer – Major Projects as she was leaving the West Suffolk Authorities for pastures new. 

On behalf of the Committee the Chairman wished the Officer well in her new role and thanked her for all her help and input.