Agenda item

Resubmission of S.19/2716/HHOLD - Revised application for creation of studio with associated landscaping & hard standings.

The Development Team Manager introduced the report which outlined an application seeking planning permission for the erection of an outbuilding to be used as a music studio and recording facility. He emphasised planning permission had previously been granted for an almost identical building in February 2020, and the resubmission sought to revise the location of the building on the site due to underground constraints associated with the original position. The revised location allows for the proposed building to sit behind an existing outbuilding to have a better physical relationship with the main house. The only change in physical appearance is the re-positioning of the double doors into the studio.

In response to concerns about the impact of the proposal on the special historic and architectural character of the listed building Moor Court, more information was provided which demonstrated that the proposed building would not be visible in long range views of Moor Court and therefore there would be no impact on the heritage asset. This position did not change following consideration of a Heritage Impact Assessment submitted by local residents.

Local residents also submitted a report on land stability. The Development Team Manager clarified that as the application did not propose any change of use of land from the existing residential use, it would not be appropriate to apply any conditions to manage any land stability issues.

The recommendation was therefore to grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the report.

Councillor Hurst, as Ward Councillor for Minchinhampton, responded to the application following discussion with local residents who had raised a number of concerns. Whilst in principle supporting the recommendation, he sought clarification on a number of conditions:

1. He proposed that a Site Datum be established so that the height of the proposed building cannot be more than 150mm higher than the adjoining track;

2. In relation to noise he suggested that some acoustic control be registered at the boundary between the proposed building and Moor Court which should not exceed 50-55 decibels;

3. In relation to light spillage, he indicated the applicant was prepared to introduce light control blinds on the building’s roof lights so it would be appropriate to include this as a condition.

The Development Team Manager indicated that any issues relating to light spillage should be covered by condition 7, which requires a strategy for any external lighting, so any condition relating to blinds would have to meet the test of a condition. In relation to noise, as the Environmental Health Officer had been consulted on the application, and had not raised objections, members would need to justify any condition in this regard.

Councillor Jones asked how a condition on noise could be justified. The Development Team Manager explained that the application relates to operational development, and members would have to evaluate whether the proposed element of residential use is particularly different to how other parts of the residential area are being used. In addition, enforcement of acceptable noise levels is controlled through specific Environmental Protection legislation, not through planning, so members would need to agree this constitutes a significant concern in this case to justify a condition.

In response to some concerns raised about the boundary between domestic and commercial use of the proposed building, the Development Team Manager indicated that this is covered in conditions 3 and 4 as set out in the report.

The substantive Motion, in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation to grant permission, was proposed by Councillor Williams and seconded by Councillor Clifton.

On being put to the vote, it was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED To grant Permission for Application S.20/2729/HHOLD