Agenda item

We considered the report of the application and late correspondence which was presented for refusal for the one reason, as outlined in the report.

Councillor C.D. Woodhouse, representing Abergavenny Town Council, attended the meeting by invitation of the Chair and outlined the following points:

·         The Town Council had replied to the County Council stating that subject to all relevant conservation planning being met and the site visit taking place, which had happened, the Town Council would recommend approval of the application.

·         The building has been empty for five years with minimal effect on the main street.

·         There will be a small employment loss because of the failure to open this retail.

·         The Committee was asked to pay particular attention to the archaeological report.  There are discrepancies between the County Council’s opinion and that of the report author.

·         The Town Council considers that this matter needs to be resolved as quickly as possible.

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

·         The Britannia Inn in 2005 was considered important enough to be listed Grade II.

·         Having visited the Inn recently, he was shocked at the internal state of the building.

·         The neglect of the building cannot be used as the excuse to further abuse the interior by raising the first floor.

·         The applicant has indicated that he has failed to let the building to companies.  However, the letting of buildings is not a planning matter.

·         The Conservation Officer has looked at recent approved planning permissions and has been flexible in aiding the applicant to maintain and let the building.

·         Paragraph 3 of the report of the application, planning policy relates to heritage buildings to the Local Development Plan (LDP).  Both bullet points are relevant and lead to Policy HE1 – Development in Conservation Areas.

·         The Conservation Officer has provided a detailed assessment of the property and the planning rules and regulations.

·         In view of the Conservation Officer’s evaluation and the interpretation of Cadw’s conservation principles he stated that he would support the Officer recommendation to refuse the application.

Having considered the report of the application and the views expressed, some Members expressed their sympathy for the applicant as the floor in question was already in a poor condition.  Also, from the outside the building fitted in with the street scene and the removal of the first floor would create no detrimental effect to the street scene.  Approval of the application would bring the building back into use within the town.

However, other Members considered that a suitable option was available to raise the first floor by 400mm providing adequate ceiling height to the ground floor.

It was therefore proposed by County Councillor D. L. Edwards and seconded by County Councillor P. Murphy that application DC/2016/01380 be refused for the one reason, as outlined in the report.

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

For refusal                 -           9

Against refusal         -           5

Abstentions               -           0

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that application DC/2016/01380 be refused for the one reason, as outlined in the report.