Agenda item

Single Storey Extension to Eastern Gable and formation of opening between extension and existing kitchen (Listed Building)atCommon Bank, Fallgate, Milltown.

 (Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that a Planning Application had been submitted for a single storey extension to an eastern gable and the formation of an opening  between the extension and the existing kitchen of a listed building at at Common Bank, Fallgate, Milltown.

The Application had been referred to Committee by local Ward Member Councillor W Armitage, on the grounds that a relation of the Applicant was employed by the Council. This had been determined to be a valid request by the Council’s Legal Service.

Planning Committee was recommended to reject the Application. The report to Committee explained the reasons for this.

Officers felt that the benefits of the scheme would not outweigh the harm which it would do to the listed building and its setting. They pointed out that various other changes to the building had already taken place. The proposed development, when considered in the context of these other changes, would dilute the building’s character, and so harm the listed building’s setting, contrary to national and local Planning Policies.

Before Committee considered the Application it heard from S Wortley, the Applicant and C Stainton, acting for the Agent. No one spoke against the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the Principle of Development and the site’s location in the open countryside, outside of any defined Settlement Development Limit. It considered the relevant Planning Policies. These included Local Plan Policy LC5, requiring extensions to dwellings to be in keeping with the existing property and the street scene and Local Plan Policy SS9, requiring developments to respect the form, scale and character of the landscape. Committee also took into account Local Plan Policy SDC12 and Ashover Neighbourhood Plan Policy AP11, requiring development proposals to respond positively to local character and Local Plan Policy SDC6 and Ashover Neighbourhood Plan Policy, requiring developments to preserve the significance of heritage assets and their setting.

Members discussed the Application. They reflected on the scope and scale of the proposed development. They discussed the current state of repair of the building gable and what contribution the proposed development would make towards stabilising this. Some Members felt that the proposed extension would be in line with the appropriate Planning Policies. They felt that the proposed extension would be of small scale, which would not detract from the property.  Some Councillors felt that as the proposed development would be difficult to see from publicly accessible areas it would have minimal impact on the landscape. 

At the conclusion of the discussion Councillor M Foster and Councillor H Liggett moved and seconded a Motion to approve the Application, contrary to officer recommendations. The Motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED

That the application be conditionally approved, contrary to officer recommendations

That the final wording of the conditions be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Management) in consultation with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Council.

Reasons

That the Application accords with the appropriate local and national Planning Policies, including Local Plan Policies SC5, SS9 and SDC6 and SDC 12 and in particular, that it would preserve the significance of the building as a heritage asset.