Agenda item

DM/17/00764/FPA - Hilton Hall Farm, Hilton

Conversion of farm buildings to 5no. dwellings;  demolition of farm sheds to the rear and construction of 4no. dwellings with garages and associated works.

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer regarding an application for the conversion of farm buildings to 5 dwellings, the demolition of farm sheds to the rear and construction of 4 dwellings with garages and associated works at Hilton Hall Farm, Hilton (for copy see file of Minutes).

 

T Burnham, Senior Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation of the application which included a site location plan, aerial view of the site, various photographs of the site, site layout plan and elevations of barn conversions and the new builds.

 

Members of the Committee had visited the site and were familiar with its location and setting.

 

The Senior Planning Officer informed the Committee it was proposed to amend Condition 4 of the proposed permission to remove the words ‘highways adoption compatible’.

 

Councillor Richardson, local Member, informed the Committee that some aspects of the application did not fit with the village of Hilton and the area of Teesdale.  Local residents had expressed concern, particularly at the four dwellings proposed at the rear of the site which would be glass faced, face south towards Reeth and Richmond and would reflect sunlight.  These proposed dwellings were of a contemporary design which would be out of character with the surrounding area.  Hilton was a small hamlet or village of only approximately 20 residents all of whom were concerned by this application.  The only element of the application of concern was that proposed for the rear of the site which did not fit with the area.  The road from the village to Morton Tinmouth and Bolam was single track and there was concern about the extra traffic the development would generate.  Councillor Richardson moved that the application be refused on the grounds that the design did not fit the amenity of the area nor the character and appearance of the area.

 

The Principal DM Engineer informed the Committee that the development would generate 1 extra traffic movement every 10 minutes and this was not considered to be a sustainable highways objection.

 

The Senor Planning Officer informed the Committee that discussions had taken place with the applicant following the submission of their initial plans which were not considered to be appropriate as they proposed a more urban type of property.  The plans now were more contemporary and the approach was supported by officers.  There would be a degree of recess on the glass façade.

 

Councillor Clare informed the Committee that while he agreed the development was in danger of being intrusive, attempts had been made to mirror the form of the building already there in terms of shape.

 

Councillor Atkinson informed the Committee that it was a subjective view that the proposed development would not fit in with the Teesdale area.

 

Councillor Shuttleworth supported the views put forward by Councillor Richardson as the local Member.  He considered that the views of the local Member were paramount and agreed that the proposed development would not fit with the Teesdale area.  Councillor Shuttleworth seconded refusal of the application.

 

Upon a vote being taken the motion was lost.

 

Moved by Councillor Atkinson, Seconded by Councillor McKeon and

 

Resolved:

That the application be approved subject to the conditions contained in the report, as amended.

Supporting documents: