Agenda item

Demolition of existing single and two storey extensions and outbuildings associated with the public house. Retention and conversion of the original public house building to form 2 no. residential units plus the erection of an additional 14 no. residential units on the site, provision of a wild flower meadow, car parking, landscaping, amenity space and other associated works.

Officers introduced the report and directed members to note the changes in the addendum circulated at the meeting. Members were advised that the main issue was related to the principle of the development on green belt. No part of the areas in the opposite site had been shown to be in the flood risk area and the existing public house would be retrained in an acceptable manner. The new blocks would be set quite far back and very special circumstances existed in this particular case.

It was highlighted that there had been historical issues relating to dumping in the area and the proposed development would resolve this and furthermore, issues relating to the unkempt condition of the land at the rear would also be addressed.

The Head of Planning, Green Spaces and Culture added that existing buildings on proposed site were over 4 years old and therefore could not be subjected to any action. 

A Member stated that they were sadly opposed to this proposal for the mere fact that it would be offering much needed affordable housing but felt very strongly that they could not approve this application, as it would set a precedent. The Member also felt strongly that green belt policy should be strictly adhered to and highlighted that in particular, that development in the green belt area had already been given as an exception for education and residential developing would altogether be an unacceptable step.

A Member added that they considered the proposal to be a good development in an area that was fast becoming an eye saw and a tip. This application would develop Anglers Retreat Public House to make it habitable and adapt the field into a meadow at the same time.

A Member suggested that if the Committee was minded to approve the application, a condition should be added to prevent the removal of landscaping.

Condition 10 was amended.

In answer to a query regarding floorspace, Officers advised that the current floor space was 830sq metres and the floorspace for the proposal would be 1260sq metres.

The Chairman added that the propose floorspace would be nearly 50% more and suggested that from single-storey to two-storey, this would inevitably have an impact on the openness of the area.

Officers added that Members would need to make a judgement as to whether the scheme would adversely affect the openness of the area. It was suggested that a site visit might be appropriate in assisting Members to make a decision. Officers would also provide further information relating to the design and access so that Members could consideration whether the proposed scheme affected the openness or not.

The Legal Advisor advised that if Members had concerns over the issue of openness, it would be in order for the Committee to defer the application in order to make a site visit.

It was moved, seconded and agreed that the application be deferred for a site visit and for further details to be provided.

Resolved- That the application be deferred for a site visit and for further details to be provided as follows:

• Feedback what effect the removal of bunding would have
• Clarify how amenity spaces would be protected
• Provide further clarification on flooding issues.