New home plans near Newport thrown out by councillors
Councillors have thrown out plans for a new house on the Shropshire/Staffordshire border– despite calls for the decision to be delayed.
Planning officers at Stafford Borough Council had recommended the application, earmarked for a plot of land next to Sutton Barns in Sutton, near Newport, be refused consent for reasons including road safety risks and proximity to a neighbouring home.
The “contemporary design” of the proposed 1.5-storey house and dormer garage with first-floor apartment was also considered to “result in an intrusive and architecturally discordant feature within the immediate setting of the Grade II-listed Sutton House Farm and its curtilage listed converted barns”, a report to the council’s planning committee said. Planning permission to convert the former barns into four homes was granted in the 1990s.
Applicant Derek Batey urged the planning committee to defer its decision at a meeting on Wednesday (January 28). He said the recommendation to the committee was based on “procedural errors” and said details requested from the council via a Freedom of Information enquiry had only been received the day before.
He said: “I’m not a property developer, I’m a 75-year-old retired computer professional and have been the steward of the Sutton Barns site for 30 years. In 1995 I converted the barns to provide homes for my ex-employees and friends -this application is for a single dwelling on a retained plot for my family’s future.”
Committee member Councillor Bryan Cross backed the deferral request, but later withdrew his proposal. The committee went on to refuse planning permission.
The application was referred to the committee for consideration because “the development raises unusual issues of planning policy”. Ward councillor Scott Spencer told the committee on Wednesday: “Nothing has been built in this area since the 19th century.
“I have nothing against development in this area as such. However we do need to take into account the barns are currently in the listed curtilage.
“Even if they weren’t listed, the property’s design and size is incongruous and unsympathetic for the area. It’s a bit modern and doesn’t take into account its historic setting.”
