Erection of 1No dwelling with detached garage (revised scheme)

(The Chairman, as the local ward Councillor for this application vacated the Chair and the Vice-Chairman, Councillor Paul Wynn presided for this item.)

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application for the erection of one dwelling with detached garage (revised scheme), drawing Members’ attention to the schedule of additional letters and confirming that Members had attended a site visit that morning and had assessed the impact of the proposed development on neighbouring properties and the surrounding area.  The Principal Planning Officer drew Members’ attention to the need to pay special regard to the desirability of preserving the listed building and its setting in accordance with S66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservations Area) Act 1990 and Part 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Councillor Nick Barclay, on behalf of Kinnerley Parish Council, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

·         The cumulative effect of new development within Kinnerely meant that the village had already made a significant contribution to the Council’s five year housing land supply; and

·         The historic setting of the Cross Keys Inn must be protected.

Mr Charles Green, on behalf of The Cross Keys Action Committee, spoke against the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

·         The Public House was currently thriving;

·         It had been registered as a community asset;

·         The Grade II listing of the public house meant that it had historical significance and it dated from the 14^th Century; and

·         Weight should be given to paragraph 132 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Mr Malcolm Guest, agent for the applicant, spoke in support of the proposal in accordance with Shropshire Council’s Scheme for Public Speaking at Planning Committees during which the following points were raised:

·         The loss of a section of the beer garden was offset by the fact that there was ample space for a large beer garden at the rear of the pub; and

·         Changes were required to the Public House to ensure that it remained viable.

By virtue of the amendment made to Shropshire Council’s Constitution, as agreed at the meeting of Council held on 27 February 2014, Councillor Arthur Walpole, as the Local Member, made a statement, and then left the room, taking no part in the debate and did not vote. During his statement the following points were raised:

·         The Cross Keys Inn had been registered as a designated community asset, which represented the extent of the effort to protect a critical asset to the village;

·         One dwelling built on the site would result in a critical loss of viability to the public house; and

·         Kinnerley did not need any more houses.

During the ensuing debate, Members expressed concern at the close proximity of the proposed dwelling and the harm that the development would cause to the public house, which was a Grade II Listed Building and this would change the historical context of the centre of the village, including the listed Church, notwithstanding that English Heritage and the Council’s Conservations Officer had not objected.  As such Members considered that the development was contrary to Policy 6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy taking into account the character of the local area. 

RESOLVED:

That Planning Permission be refused contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the following reason:

The development would cause substantial harm to the Grade II Listed Building due to its close proximity, which would change the historical context in which it is set and the historical environment in the centre of the village, including how it is read in connection with the listed pub and would have an adverse effect on the setting of the listed Church on the opposite side of the road.  As such, the scheme does not contribute towards protecting, conserving or enhancing the natural and built environment, contrary to Policy 6 of the Shropshire Core Strategy and Paragraphs 131 and 132 of the NPPF.  These factors were identified as significantly and demonstrably outweighing the positive benefits to the community and the viability of the public house.