Agenda item

We considered the report of the application and late correspondence which was recommended for approval subject to the eight conditions outlined in the report.

The local Member for Shirenewton, also a Planning Committee Member, outlined the following points:

·         Vehicles that are parked on the front of the property can only egress from this area by reversing onto the A48 which is a dangerous manoeuvre. Vehicles travelling along the A48 have a restricted view of the vehicles joining the A48 from the front of the building.

·         Parking provision on the existing plans is similar to permission granted in 2017.  In the previous plan there were 32 parking spaces for the wedding venue. The temporary storage area will be removed with the new building replacing it. However, four parking spaces will be lost and the area at the front of the building is not a safe place to provide formal parking provision.

·         The original consent was for a wedding venue. However, this now provides six bed accommodation. The local Member questioned whether planning consent was required for this. This will increase the issues surrounding parking provision on the site.

·         The adjacent field has been hired and used for parking provision but would be unsuitable in times of inclement weather.

·         Mathern Community Council considers that approval of the application will result in over development of the site.

·         The local Member considered that should the application be approved then very strong conditions needed to be added to the existing conditions outlined in the report, namely: that the storage unit is non-residential and not sold as a separate plot, that the fence be removed to ensure that the area is available which is currently referred to as a service area, the hours of business to operate no later than midnight as it narrows the gap between Mounton House Lodge and the nearby house, no parking should be allowed at the front of the building in the interests of highway and pedestrian safety and the implementation of an approved travel plan for staff and visitors for parking including when accommodation is used inclusively or independently.

·         The local Member asked the Planning Committee to consider refusal of the application on the grounds of overdevelopment of the site and the parking concerns. If the Committee considered approval of the application, a request was made for the additional five conditions to be added.

In response to the points raised by the local Member, the Development Services Manager informed the Planning Committee that a condition could be added to prevent vehicles parking at the front of the building. In terms of the condition being ancillary and not used for living accommodation, this could be achieved. Removal of the fence could also be undertaken. However, the approved layout could be enforced so that the fence would be taken down to accommodate the new building and re-arranged parking in that area. It would be unlikely that a condition could be added to limit the operating hours of business to midnight in isolation for this new building. With regard to the travel plan, this application refers to an outbuilding rather than the wedding venue itself which already has permission.

Having considered the report of the application and the views expressed, the following points were noted:

·         Concern was expressed regarding the parking provision at the front of the property and it was considered that this area should not be formally included within the application as a parking area.

·         The site line for vehicles travelling along the A48 approaching the Mounton Brook Lodge was obscured by a sign.  Removal of the sign to a more appropriate location would improve the sight line for vehicles.

·         It was noted that the speed limit on this section of the A48 had been reduced from 40mph to 30 mph with electronic signage requesting motorists to slow down.

The local Member summed up as follows:

·         A condition be added that no parking should be allowed at the front of the building in the interests of highway and pedestrian safety.

·         The hours of business should operate no later than midnight as it narrows the gap between Mounton House Lodge and the nearby house

·         The fence should be removed.

·         In terms of the condition being ancillary and not used for living accommodation, this could be achieved.

·         The Development Services Manager had stated that officers would liaise with the applicant with a view to relocating the sign to a more suitable location.

Following consultation with the Development Services Manager, two additional conditions would be added to the existing conditions outlined in the report, namely:

·         To ensure the approved outbuilding is ancillary but is not used for guest accommodation in association with the primary wedding / function use or as a separate residential use.

·         The four parking spaces identified at the front of the building shall not be formally marked out for use.

It was proposed by County Councillor P. Murphy and seconded by County Councillor R. Harris that application DM/2020/01258 be approved subject to the eight conditions outlined in the report and subject to the two additional conditions, as follows:

·         To ensure the approved outbuilding is ancillary but is not used for guest accommodation in association with the primary wedding / function use or as a separate residential use.

·         The four parking spaces identified at the front of the building shall not be formally marked out for use.

Upon being put to the vote the following votes were recorded:

For approval             -           13

Against approval      -           0

Abstentions               -           1

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that application DM/2020/01258 be approved subject to the eight conditions outlined in the report and subject to the two additional conditions, as follows:

·         To ensure the approved outbuilding is ancillary but is not used for guest accommodation in association with the primary wedding / function use or as a separate residential use.

·         The four parking spaces identified at the front of the building shall not be formally marked out for use.