COMMITTEE REPORT Application 11/02798/VARY Reference Site Address Gorcott Hall, Gorcott Hill, Beoley, Redditch Proposed removal of condition 2 of planning permission 09/01025/FUL which limited permission for mixed use single residence, venue for weddings, events and dinner parties to a Proposals temporary 2 year period. Also proposed variation of condition 3 which limited the number of events to 12 per year to allow up to a maximum of 18 per year. Case Officer Lucy Hammond Presenting Officer Tamasine Swan Applicant Mrs Alison Foxon Ward Member(s) Cllr Kerridge Parish Council Mappleborough Green Reason for Referral Support from Ward Member to Committee Recommendation REFUSE 1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Planning permission is sought to remove condition 2 from a previously approved planning permission (granting consent for a change of use of a single residence to a mixed use of single residence and venue for weddings, events and dinner parties); condition 2 limited permission to a temporary 2 year period. This application also proposes to vary the wording of condition 3, which limited the number of events to 12 per year to allow up to a maximum of 18 per year. 2. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND SURROUNDINGS (INCLUDING RELEVANT PLANNING CONSTRAINTS) The application site is located within the West Midlands Green Belt, approximately 1.5km north of the village of Mappleborough Green. It lies adjacent to the A435 at a point at which it is a dual carriageway. The site is land locked on all sides with access and egress directly onto the A435. Gorcott Hall is a Grade II* listed building with associated barns and outbuildings, some of which are Grade II listed. The site is well screened from public view by existing mature planting to the site boundaries and has no neighbouring properties on any side. 3. HISTORY/BACKGROUND Reference Number Proposal Decision and date 09/01025/FUL Change of use of existing buildings Refused 21.01.2010 from a single residence to a mixed use Allowed at appeal 17.12.2010 of single residence and venue for weddings, events and dinner parties. 05/03098/FUL Conversion of outbuildings to form Approved 07.02.2006 residential accommodation, storage and garaging together with new link to house. 05/03099/LBC Conversion of barns and new link to Approved 07.02.2006 house with single storey extension. 4. RELEVANT POLICY CONTEXT The Development Plan Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) Scheme is not of regional significance Warwickshire Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 (Saved Policies) None relevant to this application Stratford-on-Avon District Local Plan Review 1996-2011 (saved policies) PR.1 Landscape and Settlement Character PR.2 Green Belt DEV.1 Layout and Design DEV.4 Access DEV.5 Car Parking DEV.8 Energy Conservation COM.17 Rural Employment CTY.1 Control over Development Other Material Considerations Central Government Guidance PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG2 Green Belt Draft National Planning Policy Framework Supplementary Planning Guidance and Supplementary Planning Documents District Design Guide Other Documents Corporate Strategy Draft Core Strategy Other Legislation Human Rights Act 1998 Equalities Act 2010 Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 5. APPLICANT’S COMMENTS Covering letter Additional information/plan regarding visibility splays at access 6. PARISH COUNCIL No representations (25.01.2012) 7. WARD MEMBERS The comments made by the Ward Member(s) have been summarised by the case officer. Councillor Kerridge Support: [1] Seems to fit Stratford policy with regard to business development and has no draw backs (04.01.2012) [2] Would like to see a resolution of condition 4 of the original permission regarding improvements to the visibility. Improving road safety would increase the likelihood of continuing support for the application (01.03.2012) 8. THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS None 9. CONSULTATIONS WCC Highways Objection on the grounds of the existing access being inadequate (06.01.2012) WCC Museum (Ecology) No comment – not an ecological issue (19.01.2012) 10. ASSESSMENT OF THE KEY ISSUES Principle of Development Notwithstanding the fact that the Local Planning Authority refused the previous planning application (ref.09/01025/FUL), the principle of development was established through the subsequent appeal which was allowed by the Planning Inspector. This permitted the change of use of some of the buildings on site to facilitate weddings and other events. However, the Inspector imposed conditions amongst which was one granting only a temporary 2 year consent and the other placed a restriction on the number of events that could take place annually at the site. Since it is the removal and variation of these conditions that is sought through the submission of this current application I consider the principle of development continues to be acceptable with regard to saved policy PR.2 in respect of Green Belt and the assessment of the relevant key issues, particularly relating to highway safety are addressed below in the following sections. Due to the property being bounded by the A4023 Coventry Highway to the south and the A435 to the east, I consider the local highway network would be capable of accommodating the proposed levels of traffic from the uses now in operation at the site. Therefore, with regard to sustainability, I consider the proposal is acceptable. Impact on highway safety The only vehicular access into and out of the site is from the slip road providing access onto the A435 from the A4023. The western property boundary is made up of a number of large trees, partially reducing visibility along the slip road when exiting the site onto the A435. Condition 4 of the permission allowed at appeal required details to be forthcoming of improvement works to be carried out to the trees along the frontage to improve visibility. Even with such works carried out it would still result in substandard visibility splays for a dual carriageway road with a de-restricted speed limit. However no such details were forthcoming and the condition was never discharged. The use has been operating at the site for over a year now and it is only throughout the life of this application, at my request, that details of improvement works to the visibility at the front of the site have been submitted. The applicant states that such works have already been carried out and a recent site visit would confirm that this is correct, although it appears the works were carried out some time ago without the condition having been discharged. Unfortunately the Inspector did not provide reasons for the imposition of conditions 2 and 3 (with regard to the temporary consent and limit on number of events). Nevertheless, it is my opinion that these conditions were considered necessary to ensure that any impact on highway safety was regulated and kept to a minimum. The Highways Authority previously objected on the grounds that the existing access was inadequate to support the intensification which would result from the proposed use. Although the Inspector disagreed with the comments from the Highways Authority the imposition of conditions 2 and 3 at least managed the proposed development with respect to impact on highway safety. However, since this application now wishes to further increase the number of vehicle trips generated and moreover remove the temporary consent altogether which would result in a permanent permission, if allowed, the Highways Authority have maintained their original objection for the same reasons as before. I have no reason to disagree with the comments made by the Highways Authority. Just because there are no records of any accidents at this location since permission was granted does not, in my opinion, mean that the access, its relationship with the A435 and proximity to the slip road and junction with the A4023 is any more adequate or likely to result in less vehicular conflicts than when previously assessed in 2010. Furthermore, in view of the fact that the required information in respect of the visibility splays was never forthcoming at the appropriate time and the use has been in operation since in breach of condition 4 I do not consider there are any material reasons or indeed any other benefits resulting from the development which would outweigh the potential harm caused to highway safety. For these reasons I maintain that the removal of condition 2, thus allowing a permanent permission, and the variation of condition 3 to allow an increase in the number of annual events from 12 to 18 would be in conflict with saved policy DEV.4 of the Local Plan Review which expects all development to have satisfactory regard to access arrangements and ensure that a proposal will not cause unacceptable harm to highway safety. NERC The nature of the proposals does not raise any ecological issues or concerns. There is therefore no objection on ecological grounds. It is the duty of the Authority to have regard to conserving biodiversity, including in relation to living organisms or types of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. I am satisfied that appropriate regard has been given to the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006. Conclusions The principle of development, i.e. the use of buildings for weddings and other events, was established through the appeal being allowed by the Inspector which followed the Council’s refusal of 09/01025/FUL. Condition 2 was imposed granting a 2 year temporary consent while condition 3 limited the number of annual events to no more than 12 days. The current application seeks to remove condition 2 which would result in a permanent permission and vary condition 3 so that the number of annual events allowed to take place can be increased from 12 to 18 days.