Agenda item

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

The local Member for St. Mary’s, attending the meeting by invitation of the Chairman, outlined the following concerns in respect of the application:

·         He has not received any correspondence or communication on this matter as a Chepstow Town Councillor.

·         He has received a communication from a Chepstow Town Councillor pointing out that the have been a number of objections received in respect of this application. The proposal is not in keeping with the area and will cause inconvenience to residents local to the development.

·         He urged the Planning Committee to consider seriously the views put forward by local residents and Chepstow Town Council.

·         The local Member had received correspondence from an local resident as follows:

-       The local resident had only found out about the application at the site inspection that was held on 3^rd October 2016.

-       The local resident lives very close to the proposed development and his objections to the plans are:

Ø  The proposed properties will look out of character and size for the small plot and location and will block the light and view from the riverbank to his property.

Ø  There are already in excess of 600 properties being built at the bottom of Chepstow and asked whether there was any need for further house to be built.

Ø  No objection to the pub being converted into a café and retail facility.

Ø  Concerns regarding parking provision. There is already limited parking facilities for residents and tourists on the riverbank and as the public House car park is to be developed, the lack of parking provision will be exacerbated.

Ø  The development of the car park will be detrimental to the future plans for the public house as the development of an antique shop and coffee shop at the bottom of the town would not be sustainable due to lack of parking facilities.

·        The main objection to the traffic assessment is that it doesn’t seem to take full account of the complete context. If there is a retail facility, café, parking for the residents on the new development, plus the use of land that is already use for various parking purposes, the local Member suggested that there are likely to be some serious consequences and at the very least, the highways assessment needs to be re-considered.

·         The local member asked that all views expressed by local residents and Chepstow Town Council be considered by Planning Committee before making a decision regarding this application.

The Head of Planning, Housing and Place-Shaping informed the Committee that consultation regarding the application had taken place and that a notice had also been erected on site.

Having considered the report and the views expressed by the local Member, some Members felt that the form of the development was not suitable for the area and was not in keeping with the character of the surrounding area.  The site was located within a conservation area where residents’ views were protected. Approval of the application would lead to the views of residents being obscured by two modern buildings. Further parking facilities were required at this location.

Other Members considered that this was an historical site with a unique historical bridge at the heart of the site. Any potential development at the site needed to be sympathetic and in keeping with the surrounding area. Approval of the application would exacerbate the parking issues that already existed at this location. Deferral of the application to allow the applicant come up with a radical re-design of the proposed two new buildings should be considered.

It was therefore proposed by County Councillor R. Hayward and seconded by County Councillor R. Chapman that we be minded to refuse application DC/2013/00349 on the grounds of the form of proposed building, the location within the conservation area and that it was not in keeping with the surrounding area.

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

For refusal                 -           3

Against refusal         -           6

Abstentions               -           5

The proposition was not carried.

It was proposed by County Councillor R. Harris and seconded by County Councillor D. Blakebrough that consideration of application DC/2013/00349 be deferred to a future Planning Committee meeting to allow the applicant to come up with a radical re-design of the proposed two new buildings.

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

For deferral               11

Against deferral                    3

Abstentions                           0

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that that consideration of application DC/2013/00349 be deferred to a future Planning Committee meeting to allow the applicant to come up with a radical re-design of the proposed two new buildings.