Committee and date Item South Planning Committee (Bridgnorth) 8 February 2011 9 Development Management Report Application Number: 10/05295/FUL Parish: Eaton Under Heywood Grid Ref: 348163 - 291078 Proposal: Conversion of domestic garage to holiday let accommodation and siting of new oil tank Site Address: Meadow Brook Ticklerton Church Stretton Shropshire SY6 7DQ Applicant: Mr Brian Forbes Case Officer: Trystan Williams email: [email protected] 1.0 THE PROPOSAL 1.1 This application seeks full planning permission to convert a detached garage/store within the curtilage of the above dwelling house into a self- contained unit of holiday accommodation. This involves installing three dormer windows, blocking the existing garage doors and inserting new windows and doors. Amended plans have been submitted at the request of the Local Planning Authority. 2.0 SITE LOCATION/DESCRIPTION 2.1 The property is a large detached two-storey house of stone and timber framing with rendered infill beneath a graduated stone tile roof. It stands within a generous plot alongside the Ticklerton to Hope Bowdler road, this being enclosed by native hedgerows and mature trees. This application concerns a three-bay garage with loft store situated close to the northwest boundary. It is a modern building, though of traditional construction with external materials similar to those of the house. The site is surrounded by agricultural land though with a small patch of woodland to the northwest. The closest neighbouring dwelling lies some 150 metres to the southeast. The site is within the Shropshire Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 Permit, subject to conditions. 4.0 REASON FOR COMMITTEE DECISION 4.1 In accordance with the Council’s adopted ‘Scheme of Delegation’ the application is referred to the Area Regulatory Committee because the Contact Rob Mills (01746) 713132 Page 1 of 8 South Planning Committee (Bridgnorth) : 8 February 2011 Parish Council has made representations contrary to the planning officer’s recommendation. 5.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The existing garage was approved in May 1992 under application No. SS/1/2425/P. The permission is subject to a condition stipulating that it shall only be used in connection with the house itself as a single dwelling unit and shall not be occupied as a separate dwelling or used for commercial or business purposes. 5.2 Other applications for a conservatory and new vehicular access were approved in February 1999 and September 2000 (ref. SS/1/99/09581/F and SS/1/00/11378/F). 6.0 CONSULTEE RESPONSES 6.1 Shropshire Council’s Countryside Access Team comments that although the proposal does not appear to affect a public right of way which crosses the site the applicant should ensure that: • the right of way remains open to the public and unobstructed at all times both during and following the construction work, unless a temporary closure is applied for; • vehicular movements must be arranged so as to ensure the safety of users of the right of way at all times; • the width of the right of way is not reduced; and • the surface of the right of way is not altered or damaged without prior notification; • no additional barriers such as gates or stiles are added to the right of way. 6.2 Shropshire Fire & Rescue Service – comment: It should be noted that the open plan layout of the accommodation and proposed use as holiday accommodation poses a significant risk to the occupants in case of fire. Although the proposal would conform to current Building Regulations if used as a single private dwelling, the proposed use as holiday accommodation means that the premises would fall within the scope of The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, with which it would not appear to comply. Improved escape arrangements are therefore advised, along with the installation of a sprinkler system. Consideration should also be given to access requirements for emergency fire vehicles. 6.3 Eaton under Heywood and Hope Bowdler Parish Council – objection: Whilst tourism development is generally supported, the Parish Council feels that to allow subsequent variations which totally contravene the restrictions placed on original planning permissions sets an unfortunate and unacceptable precedent. 6.4 Shropshire Council Planning Ecologist – no objection: • The building does not trigger the need for a bat survey, though because bats can occasionally be found roosting in unexpected locations and the Contact Rob Mills (01746) 713132 Page 2 of 8 South Planning Committee (Bridgnorth) : 8 February 2011 surrounding habitat has potential for bat activity the provision of a bat box on site should be ensured by condition. • The applicant should be informed of his legal responsibilities in the event that bats or active nests of wild birds are discovered on site. 7.0 PUBLIC REPRESENTATIONS 7.1 None 8.0 PLANNING POLICY 8.1 Central Government Guidance: PPS7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation 8.2 South Shropshire Local Plan Policies: SD1: Sustainable Development SDS3: Settlement Strategy SDS4: Conversion and Adaptation of Rural Buildings E1: Landscape Conservation E2: Nature Conservation E6: Design ED1: Rural Development ED3: Tourism Development 8.3 Supplementary Planning Guidance: • Conversion and Adaptation of Rural Buildings • Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism (DCLG, May 2006) 9.0 THE MAIN ISSUES • Principle of development and sustainability • Appropriateness of design • Impact on landscape quality and character • Impact on residential amenity • Impact on wildlife • Other issues raised in representations 10.0 OFFICER APPRAISAL 10.1 Principle of development and sustainability 10.1.1 Local Plan Policy ED3 promotes ‘sustainable tourism development’ which complements the scenic quality and distinctive character of the landscape and which would not have an adverse impact as a result of its location, size, design or traffic generation. It also envisages that 50% of schemes will relate to the reuse of existing rural buildings and/or previously developed land. Similarly Policy ED1 favours the reuse of existing buildings for new businesses which are of a scale and character appropriate to a rural area. 10.1.2 In this instance the building concerned was constructed relatively recently, though is attractively designed and, presumably, underused as a garage. The purpose of the condition imposed on the original planning permission was simply to ensure that the use of the building was not changed without Contact Rob Mills (01746) 713132 Page 3 of 8 South Planning Committee (Bridgnorth) : 8 February 2011 formal approval from the Local Planning Authority, and it does not necessarily follow that any other use would be unacceptable. The applicant remains perfectly entitled to apply for permission to convert the building, and this gives the LPA the opportunity to consider whether or not the new use is appropriate in terms of current planning policies. Of course other parishioners could theoretically come forward with similar proposals, each of which would have to be considered on their own merits and a decision made on material planning grounds. 10.1.3 Although the property is set in open countryside it is in reasonable proximity to Church Stretton, one of south Shropshire’s principal service centres where a range of facilities and visitor attractions is available. The surrounding area is also very popular with walkers. In terms of location, therefore, the proposal is considered to be sustainable, and given its small scale it is unlikely to generate a significant number of extra car journeys. 10.1.4 Because the formation of a wholly separate, unfettered dwelling unit would be contrary to the locational, sustainability and affordable housing policies of the Local Plan a condition is necessary to ensure occupation only as a holiday let. Meanwhile a further condition ensures that the house itself will continue to provide the necessary supervision of the enterprise, thus obviating any potential future need for additional manager’s accommodation. 10.2 Appropriateness of design 10.2.1 Although the Supplementary Planning Guidance on the conversion of rural buildings cites the insertion of dormer windows to increase headroom as an indication that the building is unsuitable for the conversion proposed, as noted above this application concerns a relatively modern garage of no historic interest or importance. It is, however, appropriate for this ancillary outbuilding to retain its subservience to the house with which it is associated. Attempts to secure the deletion of the dormer windows, which would result in a more domestic appearance, have proved unsuccessful, though the building’s comparatively small scale will ensure that it retains a lower status. Furthermore, the blocking of the garage doors with timber cladding as shown on the amended plans will preserve the impression of openings, giving something of the appearance of a converted barn or cart shed. On balance, therefore, the design is considered to be acceptable. 10.3 Impact on landscape quality and character 10.3.1 These relatively modest alterations to an existing building which appears visually related to the main house and which is only visible at close range will not harm the generally open character or natural beauty of the wider landscape. 10.4 Impact on residential amenity 10.4.1 Given its distance from other dwellings the conversion of the garage into a single unit of holiday accommodation will cause no demonstrable harm to local residents in terms of noise, disturbance or overlooking. Contact Rob Mills (01746) 713132 Page 4 of 8 South Planning Committee (Bridgnorth) : 8 February 2011 10.5 Impact on wildlife 10.5.1 As noted above the Council’s Planning Ecologist suggests a condition requiring the provision of bat boxes, though because the proposal does not trigger the need for a bat survey and there is no specific evidence of bat activity on the site it would not be reasonable to insist upon this betterment under the planning process.