Agenda item

To consider a planning application for the change of use from hotel function rooms to provide 9no. self contained apartments (Revised Scheme).

Resolved:

To Refuse Permission for the following reasons:

The proposal for the conversion of the existing building to 9 self-contained residential dwellings would result in an overdevelopment of the existing small hamlet of Edingworth taking into account the present density and scale of the settlement. As such the provision of 9 dwellings within this location would be out of keeping and unsustainable with the size and built form of the locality, which is a significant distance from existing services and facilities to serve such an increase in residential occupants. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S2, CO1 and D2 of the Sedgemoor District Local Plan.

The information submitted to support the planning application is of insufficient quality to fully assess the visual impact of the development on the site and surrounding area and therefore the Authority is unable to confirm the proposal would result in a high quality development as required by Policy D2.

(For 5, Against 4, Abstention 1)

The planning officer introduced the application to the committee with the aid of a powerpoint presentation. There was an update to his written report as Condition 6 would be removed as Condition 8 repeats with more detail.

The committee were addressed by a representative of the Parish Council who considered that this application was not needed, with Affordable Housing being provided through the development at East Brent and this would take the total of homes higher than the 12 on the Affordable Housing Needs Assessment. There were 12 registered homes within Edingworth but there were 73 park homes where the residents have claimed permanent residency.  It was also considered that the application did not meet Policies CO1 and CO3 nor were there any play spaces provided within the application.

The agent then addressed the committee explaining that the application was to convert the hotel to 9 residential units, he also confirmed that the hotel was not connected to the park homes site. He stated that this was a brownfield site, it would need minimal alterations and there would be internal amendments only into 3 bed apartments.

During the debate, the Planning Officer confirmed that were on-going enforcement investigations, but this was separate to this proposal.

During discussions, there were varying views expressed by Members including an adverse impact on the hamlet of Edingworth, no nearby facilities and therefore the site was not sustainable, also flood risk was an issue. It was explained by the Officers that this was for the conversion of an existing building and that the proposal had met the sequential and exceptions test and that there would be mitigation measures in place.

At the conclusion of the debate, it was proposed by Councillor Murphy and seconded by Councillor Pearce that the application be approved subject to the conditions detailed on the Planning Officer`s report and the deletion of condition 6, however the vote was lost (For 4, Against 5, Abstention 1).

Councillor Martin then put forward that the application be refused for not meeting Policy due to over-development of the local area and being in an unsustainable location.

Resolved:

To Refuse Permission for the following reasons:

The proposal for the conversion of the existing building to 9 self-contained residential dwellings would result in an overdevelopment of the existing small hamlet of Edingworth taking into account the present density and scale of the settlement. As such the provision of 9 dwellings within this location would be out of keeping and unsustainable with the size and built form of the locality, which is a significant distance from existing services and facilities to serve such an increase in residential occupants. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S2, CO1 and D2 of the Sedgemoor District Local Plan.

The information submitted to support the planning application is of insufficient quality to fully assess the visual impact of the development on the site and surrounding area and therefore the Authority is unable to confirm the proposal would result in a high quality development as required by Policy D2.

(For 5, Against 4, Abstention 1)