Agenda item

We considered the report of the application which was presented for refusal for the one reason, as outlined in the report. The Head of Planning informed the Committee of the changes to the application, as identified in late and further late correspondence.

The local Member for Wyesham, attending the meeting by invitation of the Chairman, outlined the following points in favour of the application:

·         Much consultation has taken place.

·         The general consensus is that approval of the application would result in increased employment to the Monmouth town, and would provide much needed accommodation for tourist visiting the town.

·         The site would be visually improved if the application was approved.

Mr. D. Cummings, representing Monmouth Chamber of Commerce, attending the meeting by invitation of the Chairman, outlined the following points in support of the application:

·         Many letters of support have been received in favour of the application.

·         Approval of the application would provide a financial benefit to Monmouth in the sum of £3.1M per year, every year.

·         The proposed development would be more in keeping with the surrounding area adding to the improvements that have already been made over the previous 15 years.

·         There will be a minimal effect on the local traffic flows.

·         The developers have met the demands of the flooding issues in the area.

·         There is ample notice of potential flooding in this area, i.e., a minimum of seven hours notice is received.

·         There will be no risk to people or property should the application be approved.

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

·         The flooding issues needed to be balanced with the benefits of the scheme.

·         The tests set out in TAN 15 include the implications of flooding.  There are three tests that the application has to pass and this is achieved in respect of the first two. However, the third test indicates that the consequences of flooding have to be acceptable.

·         The amended plans show that the development will be erected above flooding levels which includes car parking.

·         There is a need for Natural Resources Wales (NRW) to check with the applicant the modelling that has been provided.  Until this is undertaken an objection to the scheme remains via planning officers. If this is the only objection the decision could be delegated to the Delegation Panel for the scheme to be approved subject to the modelling being completed by NRW.

·         It was noted that there is no dry escape route which would be dangerous to emergency services.

·         The applicants have said that if there were a significant flood their management plan would result in the site being vacated in time.

·         If the application were approved, the Minister would have to be notified who might then call in the application.

·         In response to a Member’s question regarding the visual impact of the proposed scheme, it was noted that this matter would be dealt with at the reserved matters application stage.

·         The benefits of having a hotel at this location would be vast.

·         There would be ample warning if flooding were to occur at this location allowing guests and staff to vacate the building well in advance.

It was proposed by County Councillor P. Murphy and seconded by County Councillor R. Hayward that application DC/2015/01431 be deferred to be approved via the Delegation Panel, provided the modelling exercise indicates the proposal would not have increased the risk of flooding elsewhere.

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

In favour of the proposal                -           11

Against the proposal                       -           0

Abstentions                                       -           0

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that application DC/2015/01431 be deferred to be approved via the Delegation Panel, provided the modelling exercise indicates the proposal would not have increased the risk of flooding elsewhere.