Issue - meetings

RESOLVED: That application 20/00643/LBC be GRANTED Listed Building Consent subject to the reasons and conditions set out in the report of the Development and Conservation Manager.

Audio Recording – 3 hours 20 minutes.

N.B The presentations, debate and consideration of Items 13 and 14 are recorded here at Minute 147.

The Conservation Officer presented the report in respect of application 20/00643/LBC supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans along with the following update:

·                The description of the proposal should be amended to omit reference to the single storey extension to front (east side) of West Stables.

·                The application has been amended by drawing nos. 11F, 12F, 13E, 14F, 15D, 16D, 17B, 18G, 19E, 20D and 22B received on 16 December 2020 and amplified by drawing nos. REF-MNP-WSC-SK-S-4011 Rev P1 and MBS-280 East Stables and MBS-280 West Stables received on 21 January 2021.

The following Members asked questions:

·                Councillor David Levett

In response to questions the Conservation Officer advised that the buildings at risk register categorised sites according to their condition and state of occupancy; if a property was vacant and in fair condition it would be considered vulnerable; if vacant and in poor condition it is ‘at risk.’ According to structural assessments this was in fair condition and as are considered ‘vulnerable’ and if left unoccupied and unmaintained could fall in to a higher ‘at risk’ category.

The Development and Conservation Manager presented the report in respect of application 20/00642/FP supported by a visual presentation consisting of photographs and plans.

The Chair invited Mr Hunter Peace to address the Committee.

Mr Hunter Peace thanked the Chair for the opportunity to address the Committee and gave a presentation including:

·                He objected to the proposals;

·                He had no objection to the conversion of existing buildings on the plot and the conversion of all existing buildings would triple the available floor space on the site;

·                The locale was uniquely unspoilt by modern building development and was one of the few truly rural locations in Hertfordshire;

·                The site was of high heritage value;

·                The owners had already erected two stable buildings in front of the listed barn house and further applications were expected;

·                Demolition work had been carried out and no enforcement action by the Council had been taken; the buildings were not at imminent risk of collapse as had been claimed;

·                There was a statutory duty to protect heritage assets and to avoid harm but there was no evidence these properties would fall in to the at risk category without this development;

·                The proposed cladding of the property and the link buildings between existing structures were out of keeping with the area;

·                No landscaping recommendations had been made.

The Chair invited Councillor John Bishop to address the Committee:

·                There was a statutory duty to protect heritage assets;

·                This proposal represented overdevelopment of the site;

·                It was not returning the site to its optimal use;

·                There were grounds to refuse these applications on the basis that there was no public benefit to compensate for the harm caused to a listed building; the officer had identified one benefit based on an unfounded assumption only.

The Chair invited Mr  ...  view the full minutes text for item 147