URL: https://democracy.telford.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=235

Decision Maker: Planning Committee

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: This was an application for the conversion of 2no. barns to 2no. dwellings at Barns to the rear of 28 Woodhouse Lane, Horsehay, Telford, Shropshire.   Dawley Hamlets Parish Council had requested that the application be determined by the Planning Committee.   The Planning Officer set out that the application sought full planning permission for the conversion of 2 barns to the rear of the application site.   Cllr Z Hannington, Dawley Hamlets Parish Council, spoke against the application and raised concerns regarding poor road infrastructure and parked cars which exacerbated the issues, poor visibility, increased traffic, noise, loss of privacy, the inadequacy of the footings of the barns which may need underpinning, drainage and the impact on pedestrians and the safety of residents.  Further concerns were raised in regards to the change in dynamics of the road following the closure of the shop and the impact the new proposal would have on the surrounding highway network.   Mr J Harris, Applicant’s Agent, spoke in favour of the application and highlighted that there were no objections to the application from technical consultees.  The conversion of the barn did not increase the height or volume of the current buildings and the proximity to existing properties remained the same.  In relation to parking, ten parking spaces had now been proposed for use by number 27 and 28 and would also serve the barns.   Porous materials would be used to surface the car park which would mitigate any additional rain water.  It was suggested that a “H” bar be implemented to ensure that access was maintained.  Additional highways impact had been assessed as minimal and the visibility splays acceptable.  The application brought forward existing buildings which would contribute to the Local Plan housing target and there was a biodiversity net gain of 10%.   There were no technical grounds to refuse the application.   The Planning Officer informed Members that the application was in the built up area where the principle of development was considered acceptable.  The existing barns would be converted into dwellings which fell modestly behind the build line and were currently in an existing redundant state and it was an effective reuse of non-designated heritage assets.  The site was large enough to accommodate the amenity space and the off road parking scheme and was not considered to be overdevelopment.  Permitted development rights would be removed.  The existing buildings were capable of conversion without modification with some new windows and doors and the design was considered in keeping with the local character and appearance.  Current landscaping and boundary treatments would remain and would be suitably conditioned.  Further landscaping details and a landscaping management plan would be required.  Ten parking spaces had been demonstrated with a turning area and an area for delivery vehicles, and the spaces allowed sufficient turning area to exit in a forward gear.  External alterations were minimal and it was not considered to be detrimental or harmful to neighbouring properties.  Structural stability would be assessed further by building regulations and a construction management plan would be required.  The application complied with the NPPF and there were no technical or highway reasons to refuse the application.  A tree survey had been submitted and the officers were satisfied there would be no significant harm.  Ecology and Drainage Officers had been consulted and were supportive subject to conditions.  All material planning considerations had been addressed and there were no technical reasons to refuse the application.   During the debate some Members considered that the application aligned perfectly to sustainability by using existing structures to repurpose the barns.  The application did not affect the countryside and supported the Council’s Housing Plan.  It was felt that most of the objections had been dealt with and that the application would not present any more difficulties than when the buildings were formerly used as a shop and post office.  Questions were raised in respect of the reasons for the 2017 application being refused and if there would be any adverse effects on neighbouring properties in relation to the excavation of the footings.  It was asked if a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) could be introduced, double yellow lines outside number 29 or a mirror to improve visibility, whether there had been an accident survey undertaken and whether the access and egress to the site was currently being used.   The Planning Officer confirmed that the application in 2017 had been refused due to it being a request for two new build dwellings at the south of the site.  Vehicles were currently using the existing access and egress.   The Highways Officer explained to Members that on street parking could create traffic issues but this was not an impact due to the amount of trips from the existing and proposed developments.  It was suggested that a “H” bar could be introduced by number 29 which would allow a measure of protection.  In relation to double yellow lines or a TRO, it was likely that a TRO would restrict on street parking for adjacent residents and was not recommended.  The crash data from the past 15 years had shown no accidents had occurred on the lane, but that there had been an incident outside of the Travellers Joy in 2020.   On being put to the vote it was, by a majority/unanimously:   RESOLVED – that delegated authority be granted to the Development Management Service Delivery to grant full planning permission subject to the following:   a)    the conditions and informatives (with authority to finalise conditions) and reasons for approval to be delegated to Development Management Service Delivery Manager as set out in the report.

Date of Decision: March 26, 2025