Barn conversion to dwelling at Barn Adj To Windmill Cottage, London

What was proposed

The application proposed converting the existing barn into one four-bedroom dwelling, with roof changes, extensions, landscaping, parking and storage.

“Conversion of the existing barn into a single dwelling house. Associated works to main roof including new ridgeline, eaves and new roof lights. Changes to fenestration. Single storey rear extension. Demolition and construction of the existing side extensions to east and west. Associated landscaping / refuse/recycling / cycle storage and car parking with electrical vehicle charging point.”

“Materials used: - Aged/weathered oak shiplap cladding - Roof tiles to match existing on main roof - Flat roof to be sarnafil membrane - Black timber windows and doors - Red Brick to match existing - Dark oak timber shutters - Timber framed Velux Rooflights - Original Barn Doors repaired and made good - Olive Green Timber Framed Windows & Doors - New Timber Front Main Door…”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier decisions concerned telecommunications equipment and tree works, while this application was still pending consideration in the recorded site history.

“Reference: TPP/0359/23 Address: Windmill Cottage, Brickfield Lane, Barnet, EN5 3LD Decision: Trees: Approved subject to Conditions Decision Date: July 2023 Description: 1 x Poplar (applicants ref. A) - Reduce tree to a 14ft monolith. Standing in Group G3 of Tree Preservation Order.”

“Reference: 24/4469/FUL Address: Windmill Cottage, Brickfield Lane, Barnet, EN5 3LD Decision: Pending Consideration Decision Date: No Decision Made. Description: Conversion of the existing barn into a single dwelling house. Associated works to main roof including new ridgeline, eaves and new roof lights. Changes to fenestration. Single storey rear extension. Demolition and construction of the existing side extensions to east and west.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the residential use and associated boundaries, parking, storage and other features would harm Green Belt openness.

“Framework paragraph 148 advises that substantial weight should be given to any harm to the Green Belt. Paragraph 153 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2024) states that, when considering any planning application, local planning authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt, including harm to its openness.”

“Whilst the proposed extension are not considered to impact the openness of the Green Belt, the additional paraphernalia associated with the residential use of the site, such as formalisation of boundaries, additional enclosures for refuse and cycle storage, parking of cars, any further hardstanding or potential boundary walls, including children's play area/equipment, garden furniture and elements that are not capable of being conditioned but likely to introduce some…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Five neighbouring occupiers supported the application; consultees initially objected on heritage and ecology grounds, but later comments became more favourable subject to conditions.

“External consultees: Conservation and Heritage: Objections to proposal as submitted Historic England (Archaeology): No objections subject to conditions Historic England (Historic Buildings and Areas): Objections to proposal as submitted Historic Buildings and Place: Objection to proposal as submitted Ecology: Objections to proposal as submitted Drainage: No comments, due to size of development.”

“Conservation and Heritage: No objections, subject to conditions Historic England - No in principle objections, however they have concerns regarding the internal modifications Refuse and Recycling - No objections Ecology - No objections, subject to condition Highways - No objections subject to condition…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A supporter and the applicant addressed the committee in support of the application, followed by questions from members to the speakers and officers.

The committee vote

Members voted unanimously against the officer recommendation to refuse and unanimously for approval.

“The Chair moved to vote on the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application.”

Minutes

The decision

The application was approved subject to the conditions in the report because members did not consider the development would significantly harm Green Belt openness.

“Councillor Richard Barnes proposed a motion to approve the application due to the committee members agreeing they did not consider the proposed development would have significant harm on the openness of the green belt. Councillor Humayune Khalick seconded the motion. The votes were as follows:”

“RESOLVED for the application to be approved subject to conditions in the report.”

Minutes