Issue - meetings
Green Farm, Mewith Lane, Tatham
Meeting: 09/05/2018 - Planning Regulatory Committee (Item 162)
162 Green Farm, Mewith Lane, Tatham 
PDF 176 KB
Retrospective application for the change of
use of existing stable and kennel to single storey dwelling (C3)
for holiday use and erection of two front single storey extensions
for Michael Harrison
Minutes:
|
17/01575/FUL |
Retrospective application for the change of use of existing stable and kennel to single storey dwelling (C3) for holiday use and erection of two front single storey extensions for Michael Harrison. |
Lower Lune Valley Ward |
R |
It was proposed by Councillor Jane Parkinson and seconded by Councillor Mel Guilding:
“That the application be refused.”
(The proposal was contrary to the case officer’s recommendation that the application be approved).
Members clarified the reasons for the contrary proposal. Firstly, the proposal for visitor accommodation is: not located within one of the District’s urban areas or smaller settlements that is served by basic service provision; is not on a site which is allocated for such use; does not serve the needs of an existing visitor facility or attraction or located adjacent to it; and does not involve the conversion or re-use of a suitable existing rural building without significant major extensions. It is therefore deemed to be contrary to Development Management Policy DM13. Secondly, it was stated that the development proposes to more than double the footprint of the existing stable building. It is therefore considered that the conversion and re-use of this existing rural building for visitor accommodation is unachievable without significant major extensions, which is contrary to the provisions of Development Management Policy DM8.
Upon being put to the vote, 8 Members voted in favour of the proposition and 1 against, with 2 abstentions, whereupon the Chairman declared the proposal to be carried.
Resolved:
That Planning Permission be refused for the following reasons:
1. The proposal for visitor accommodation is not located within one of the District’s urban areas or smaller settlements that is served by basic service provision, is not on a site which is allocated for such use, does not serve the needs of an existing visitor facility or attraction or located adjacent to it, and does not involve the conversion or re-use of a suitable existing rural building without significant major extensions. It is therefore deemed to be contrary to Development Management Policy DM13.
2. The development proposes to more than double the footprint of the existing stable building. It is therefore considered that the conversion and re-use of this existing rural building for visitor accommodation is unachievable without significant major extensions, which is contrary to the provisions of Development Management Policy DM8.