Agenda item

57 Church Lane, Long Clawson

Applicant:     Mr Tom Fitzpatrick

Location:      Framland Lodge, 57 Church Lane, Long Clawson, Melton Mowbray

Proposal:      To rebuild and improve the old barn at Framland Lodge, to provide facilities for a small cookery school and chef's table.

 

19:17 – Cllr Steadman left the meeting.

 

(a)             The Planning Officer (SL) stated that:

This application seeks full planning permission for the re-building of an existing block built barn to provide a 2 storey building to form a cookery school and chef’s table.  The site is within the residential curtilage of Framland Lodge, and within the Conservation Area for Long Clawson. The existing building forms the boundary with St Remigius Church, a Grade II* listed building.

The application is presented to committee for determination due to the number of representations received.

Since the site visits on Monday, the applicant has confirmed that he does not own the property, and it is owned by his mother. Consequently he has now completed the correct certificate to accompany the planning application which is available to view on the file.

In the last couple of days Members have been approached by various parties regarding increased car parking provision, further restrictions to the hours and days of operation, and the extraction for the kitchen. If Members consider that these issues are justified there is scope for further or altered conditions to those which are included within the Officers report at Appendix C. At this time officers do not consider that this will be necessary to mitigate the impact of the development. In regards to car parking, it is highly unlikely that those attending the cookery school or chef’s table will attend on their own.  These activities are sociable, and the six to eight car parking spaces are considered sufficient to meet demand, bearing in mind the condition ensures that no more than 8 attendees will be present at any time. In addition, the highway authority has no objection to occasional parking in the highway if required. The neighbourhood plan only sets specific parking standards for residential developments at policy T4. This application is not for residential development. In terms of the hours of opening and operation, this has been considered and the hours as set out in the application form are considered reasonable. These are 10am to 11pm Monday to Saturday, however it is considered unlikely that these hours would be used fully.

In regards to the extraction, the environmental health officer advises that the development is relatively modest, artisan in nature, serving high quality food with limited cooking facilities and relatively short operation times. The proposed set-up should offer good dilution and dispersion of odours, and it would be onerous to require the applicant to install significant extraction infrastructure at this stage. However, the officer has advised that in the interests of good planning, that the applicants in liaison with their kitchen engineers, design the kitchen in such a manner that will allow for easy retrofitting of noise and odour abatement equipment if it becomes necessary at a later date. This will prevent substantial future costs of re-design, but prevent significant outlay now which is unlikely to be required. As stated within the Officers report, the application is considered to be supported by the relevant policies of the adopted Local Plan and the Clawson, Hose and Harby neighbourhood plan. It is considered that the proposal has been well designed in consultation with the Council’s Conservation Officer, and causes no identified harm or loss of significance to heritage assets in the vicinity.

Furthermore, the proposal represents an opportunity for the applicants to contribute towards the ‘rural capital of food’ and the ambitions of the Council in this respect. Subject to the conditions as recommended by the Officer at appendix C, the proposal is recommended for approval.

 

(a)                   Cllr Adams, on behalf of Clawson, Hose and Harby Parish Council was invited to speak and stated that:

 

·                The Parish Council submitted two objections, the second of which was an update. All of which referred to Policies H7, E2, E3, H7’s T4 relating to parking. Many were covered by the Conservation Officer and Environmental Health Team, and assumed their recommendations would be conditions.

·                Concerned over the LCC Highways response. They were unaware of the updated ownership.

·                Referred to the Neighbourhood Plan, Policy T4 which requires adequate off road parking for residential dwellings. Believed the further 8 spaces for the development would have an adverse impact on parking and traffic issues experienced especially when activities held at the church.

·                Explained how 3 spaces will be required, turning and exit as well as the additional 8 within the boundaries.

·                Comments from MBC Conservation Officer and MBC Environmental Health team to be conditioned.

A Cllr referred to Policy T4, and commented that this is a commercial not residential.

Cllr Adams replied that 3 spaces are needed for the existing residential property.

 

A Cllr asked if Cllr Adams had any evidence of existing parking issues and had these been submitted.

 

Cllr Adams stated no, but it would be busy if the church was in use.

 

(b)       Mr Connor, an objector, was invited to speak and stated that:

 

·                     Believed established planning considerations were overlooked because this is a food based application.

·                     Level of usage is vague therefore issues have been played down.

·                     Policy E4, fails on satisfactory access and being appropriate for a business. Policy E2, fails on increase of increase of noise, pollution and traffic.

·                     No other businesses in the residential Conservation Area. The character and appearance of the residential Conservation Area needs preserving.

·                     Chimney would be 1ft away from a listed wall.

·                     Overwhelming level of objections.

·                     Proposed conditions of limited use are vague and unenforceable.

·                     Concerns over highway safety as vehicles will have to reverse.

·                     Business is likely to want to expand in the future.

A Cllr queried the statement made about food and asked Mr Connor to explain further.

 

Mr Connor stated that he believed more traditional issues had been superseded/ given less importance. Greater flexibility had been given to this application due to it being food based in the Rural Capital of Food. He believed heed had not been paid to the issues.

 

(c)          Mr Fitzpatrick, the Applicant was invited to speak and stated that:

 

·                         Initial spec was broad and believes assumptions have been made.

·                         Extensive consultations have been carried out and the Design & Access Statement answers questions raised. The report shows the endorsement of the consultees.

·                         The proposed is to be high quality and low scale and is a positive thing that the Borough would like.

·                         Parking would be developed with LCC Highways.

A Cllr queried whether the two stables on the site would be retained and potentially used at a later date

Mr Fitzpatrick confirmed they are to be retained but they are not in the plans for this development.

 

A Cllr asked whether local food and drink would be used.

Mr Fitzpatrick stated that yes it would be, and they are working on projects with local suppliers.

 

The Lead Planning Officer explained that with regards to parking provision, condition 6 could be altered and there would be the possibility to require additional spaces if members considered it necessary.

 

The Assistant Director for Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services explained that Environmental Health have deemed the conventional extraction design adequate.

 

A Cllr asked the Planning Officer what their view was regarding H7 of the Neighbourhood Plan. The policy cannot be interpreted differently as this is not residential. No evidence of parking issues has been submitted.

 

The Assistant Director for Strategic Planning and Regulatory Services explained H7 is housing design. The road is of some width and no obstruction would be  caused by on street parking, as was the case during the Committee’s visit on Monday.

 

A Cllr questioned whether tighter wording may be needed to ensure it could not be used as part of the dwelling if the business didn’t work out.

 

The Planning Officer stated that this would need to be a Change of Use application and therefore a further condition would not be necessary.

 

Cllr Chandler proposed to permit the application. She couldn’t see cars being a problem and reiterated that the chefs table is only for 8 people and it is likely people will travel together in cars. There are no yellow lines and if Highways felt it was a problem then they would’ve said. It promotes tourism within the Borough and is a great opportunity.

 

Cllr Holmes seconded the proposal, adding this could have been houses and it’s a great this nearby.

 

A Cllr expressed their concerns that the Highways issues are unresolved. The proposed hours mean concerns are legitimate. Wished for this to be resolved before passing.

 

A Cllr stated that this will be an asset to the Borough. They mentioned the additional spaces that could be conditioned if needed.

 

A Cllr stated that they didn’t feel they could refuse based upon parking. Weight couldn’t be given to the policy as this is not residential.

 

A Cllr stated that if the access and parking was for a residential application then it would not be deemed acceptable. They also raised concerns over extraction. They asked where a larger chimney would go if needed, given the close proximity to the listed wall.

 

The Planning Officer explained the design shows a chimney capable of extraction. Environmental Health referred to internal extraction, it is high enough to disperse odours.

 

The Chair expressed her concerns over parking and asked whether the proposer and seconder would like to include the enhanced condition mentioned previously.

 

Cllr Chandler stated that she had no objection and was happy to include but believed it was over exaggerated.

 

A Cllr stated that with the inclusion, they would abstain from the vote.

The Chair asked if the proposed wished to stay with the original.

 

Cllr Chandler replied yes.

 

A vote was taken.

9 Members voted to permit. 1 Member voted to refuse. 1 Member abstained from the vote.

 

Decision: PERMIT, subject to conditions as set out in the officer’s report.

REASONS: The principle of the application is considered to be supported by policies EC4 and EC8 of the Melton Local Plan, and policy E2 of the Clawson, Hose and Harby Neighbourhood Plan. The proposal is located in a village considered to be sustainable. This proposal would add variety to the offer for local residents and those living further afield.

The proposal has been well designed, demonstrating that it conserves and enhances the Conservation Area, and causes no identified harm or loss to the significance of other heritage assets in the vicinity. The proposal represents an opportunity for the applicants to contribute to the economy of the village and the wider Borough, relating well to the ‘Rural Capital of Food’ and the ambitions of the Council in this respect.

 

19:58 – Meeting adjourned

20:03 – Meeting reconvened