Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of this Committee held on 19 December 2018.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 19 December 2018 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest received.

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(1)) concerning Planning Application 17/00186/COMIND in respect of the proposal to convert and refurbish the existing listed residential building into a 53 bedroom boutique hotel and private members club including Coach House extension, detached spa facility with outdoor swimming pool and enabling development in the form of 6 detached lodge units and 2 x 4 bedroom family houses.

Cheryl Willett (Senior Planning Officer) introduced the report which recommended approval subject to conditions and the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement. She explained that approval of the application would constitute a departure from the Council’s Development Plan for the reasons outlined in the report. Those reasons included:

·         The application was for a Main Town Centre Use (as defined by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)) and was not located within a town centre location.

·         The provision of two new houses in open countryside was in direct conflict with the housing supply policies of the Development Plan.

However, areas of potential harm had been weighed against the benefits that the development would bring to the public, i.e. benefits to the rural economy and securing local employment, and therefore conditional permission was, on balance, recommended.

Debra Inston (Principal Conservation and Design Officer) explained that there were a number of points to consider from the conservation viewpoint. An independent assessment (undertaken by Knight Frank) had identified a conservation deficit in the region of £4.1m and it was therefore considered that the application could only proceed and the deficit only be met as an ‘enabling development’ scheme. Enabling development was development that secured the future of a significant place (defined by Historic England as any part of the heritage environment that had heritage value, including statutory listed historic buildings). As already explained, the proposal was contrary to established planning policy, but this was occasionally permitted when the public benefit of the development was demonstrated to outweigh areas of harm.

Debra Inston went on to advise that the works proposed in the application were considered to be the minimum necessary in order to bridge the conservation deficit. The protection, restoration and preservation of The Grotto for future generations to enjoy was of considerable public benefit. She felt that the benefits outweighed the dis-benefits of the enabling development.

The benefits of the restoration would be secured by completing the Section 106 Legal Agreement. A key aspect of the Agreement would be to ensure that commercial elements of the development (the ‘enabing development’) did not proceed without the heritage aspects of the works being undertaken first. In line with this, the update report detailed a phased development. This phasing would ensure that the repair/restoration works remained a step ahead of the enabling development works. It would also ensure that the works to The Grotto were completed well in advance of the completion of the enabling development. Turning to Phase 1 as an example, it was recommended ‘Not to commence development in respect of Enabling Development Phase 1 unless and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.(1)

A date of 30 January 2019 was agreed for site visits if necessary. This was in advance of the next Eastern Area Planning Committee scheduled for 6 February 2019.