Three replacement homes at Bank Farm, Pebworth, Stratford-upon-Avon

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing agricultural barns and replacing them with three homes and associated works, in one building designed to look like a barn conversion.

“During the determination period of this application, the development has been amended from five dwellings to three. The homes would be provided within one building which is designed to appear as a ‘barn conversion’. An orchard has also been provided within the proposed open space within the site.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The former agricultural holding lies behind homes, mainly outside Pebworth’s development boundary, near listed buildings and the conservation area.

“In terms of constraints, the site lies largely outside the development boundary of Pebworth which extends over a narrow margin which runs along the northern edge of the site. There are listed buildings nearby, namely Orchard Cottage, St Peters Church and the Old Post Office while the Pebworth Conservation Area lies to the north and includes part of the access.”

“The site constraints are listed as follows: • Article 4 direction made in the Conservation Area to remove permitted development rights to specific properties. • Designated Rural Area • Green Infrastructure - Protect and Restore • Outside SWDP Development Boundary • Pebworth Conservation Area • Setting of listed buildings • Surface Water: High 1 in 30 extent…”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Several earlier housing proposals were refused, including six homes and five homes dismissed at appeal, before this application was reduced from five homes to three.

“W/12/00019/OU. Demolition of existing redundant farm buildings and construction of six dwellings, two four bed, two three bed and two bed. Refused Mar 16 2012, appeal dismissed Dec 7 2012”

“W/13/00284/OU. Demolition of existing redundant farm buildings and erection of six dwellings and associated works (including three units of intermediate social housing) resubmission of application W.12.00940.OU. Refused Apr 12 2013”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval subject to a section 106 agreement and conditions, finding the scheme’s harms did not significantly and demonstrably outweigh its benefits.

“In accordance with s.38 (6) of the 2004 Act, the application must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this instance it is material that the Council cannot demonstrate a 5-year supply of deliverable housing sites and therefore the Council’s policies for the supply cannot be considered up-to-date and the ‘tilted balance’ is engaged as per paragraph 11(d) of the Framework.”

“For the reasons set out in this report, the identified harms do not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. There are also no relevant policies in the in the Framework that protect areas or assets of particular importance provides a strong reason for refusing the development proposed. The proposal therefore represents sustainable development that meets wider aspirations of Wychavon District Council.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The parish council objected over countryside location, sustainability, heritage, landscape, access and housing need, while highways raised no objection subject to conditions.

“Pebworth Parish/Town Council: Objection for the following reasons: • Principle: Contrary to SWDP2 and the NDP due to the site’s position in the open countryside. The presumption in favour of sustainable development did not apply for APP/H1840/W/23/3331631. • Sustainability: Pebworth is a category 3 village with very few facilities, no shop and very limited bus services.”

“Housing Need: Housing needs within the parish were assessed as part of the Pebworth Neighbourhood Development Plan (PNDP) and are already being met and exceeded. • The site was assessed for housing development within the PNDP but was excluded.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The parish council and another speaker spoke against approval, while the agent spoke in support; the local member also addressed the committee.

What members debated

Members discussed the neighbourhood plan, site constraints, orchard, sustainability and historic environment, and questioned why approval was recommended after earlier appeals.

“The Local Member and members of the Committee asked questions of the speakers including with regards to the Neighbourhood Plan, site constraints, heritage orchard, sustainability of the site and the impact on the historic environment.”

“Councillor E J Kearsey stated that when first looking at the officer presentation you wondered why this was before us as it was a good design and in keeping with the area. She congratulated the Planning Officer for her report with regards to the design.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee refused the application because it conflicted with historic-environment policies, neighbourhood plan Policy P3 and lacked a section 106 agreement securing financial contributions.

“That this application be refused for the following reasons: that it is contrary to SWDP 6 (impact on the historic environment), SWDP 24 (management of the historic environment) and Pebworth Neighbourhood Plan Policy P3 and also the technical reason of a lack of a S106 agreement to secure financial contributions the final wording of the reasons for refusal to be delegated to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure.”

Minutes