Agenda item

Joel Street Farm, Joel Street, Northwood - 8856/APP/2012/767

Change of use of stables to cattery (Sui Generis) involving the removal of existing roof, raising of existing walls and installation of new roof, two storey rear extension to rear of existing building to be used as Use Class D1 (Non-Residential Institutions) for use as a nursery involving demolition of existing barn and part change of use from cattery (Sui Generis), single storey side extension to existing building involving part demolition of cattle yard and covered area, alterations to parking, and installation of vehicular crossover to front.

 

Recommendation: Refusal

 

Minutes:

Change of use of stables to cattery (Sui Generis) involving the removal of existing roof, raising of existing walls and installation of new roof, two storey rear extension to rear of existing building to be used as Use Class D1 (Non-Residential Institutions) for use as a nursery involving demolition of existing barn and part change of use from cattery (Sui Generis), single storey side extension to existing building involving part demolition of cattle yard and covered area, alterations to parking, and installation of vehicular crossover to front.

 

Officers introduced the report and drew the Committee’s attention to the changes set out in the Addendum.

 

In accordance with the Council’s constitution, a representative of the petition received in objection to the application was invited to address the meeting.

 

The petitioner made the following points:

  • The proposal to demolish and then rebuild the barn was not acceptable  for the locally listed complex
  • The proposed development would constitute an over development within the green belt and be detrimental to the historic site.
  • As the site was situated in the green belt an ecology study should be submitted
  • There were inaccuracies in the officer report in relation to the traffic statement which required correction.
  • The proposal would have a detrimental impact on local traffic
  • The application did not contain sufficient details or information about the change of use

 

In accordance with the Council’s constitution, a representative of the petition received in support of the application was invited to address the meeting.

 

The petitioner made the following points:

  • The site urgently requited capital investment to stop it from falling further  into a dilapidated state
  • The barn was in a  near state of collapse
  • The proposal did not include increasing the foot print of the site
  • The proposals incorporated income generation opportunities to recoup the investment which was anticipated to be around £250K.

 

A Ward Councillor addressed the meeting and made the following points:

  • The site had been neglected in recent years and investment was needed at the site
  • The current proposals would have a detrimental impact to the green belt
  • The application was inappropriate (in its current form).

 

In discussing the application, the Committee sought further clarification on a number of points which included local wildlife and traffic related concerns. Officers confirmed that most of the soft landscaping was maintained through regular mowing and most of the vacant buildings were used on a regular basis. As a result, there was no significant evidence of there being any damage to the local ecology. In relation to parking at the site, officers confirmed that it was proposed that the car park would be situated on a cellular system comprising of gravel laid over plastic cells. Members agreed that the site required further investment but it was essential that an application was sympathetic to the site.

 

The recommendation as stated in the report was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was unanimously agreed.

 

 

Resolved –

 

That the application be Refused as per the report, addendum and the following additional informative regarding ecology (final wording delegated to the Head of Planning, Sport and Green Spaces and provided below)

 

'You are advised that the Local Planning Authority would expect any re-submission to be accompanied by a habitat/ecological assessment relating to the site and existing buildings.'

 

 

 

Supporting documents: