6
The Committee considered report ES/1557 which related to planning application DC/21/3687/FUL. The application sought retrospective approval for the construction of a new garden to the rear of the Ship Inn which involved the creation of new hard and soft landscaping. The Referral Panel had referred the application to the Committee as the Officer recommendation to approve was contrary to the objection received from Dunwich Parish Meeting.
The Committee received a presentation from the Senior Planner, who was the case officer for the application. The Committee viewed the site location plan and an aerial image, together with photographs of the site before and after the works that had been undertaken. The Senior Planner provided images of the hardstanding and landscaping that had been established alongside an image of the mobile kitchen / bar.
The Senior Planner demonstrated the minimal visual impact of the site from the public road with a contemporary photograph. The application was recommended for approval subject to the following conditions, in summary:
- Development to accord with plans/reports
- Submission of landscaping details
- Implementation of landscaping details
- Hours of use of lighting
- Duration of use of hardstanding for siting mobile kitchen/bar (28 days)
- Submission of details of noise and odour controls for mobile kitchen/bar
The material planning considerations and key issues were:
- Impact on Conservation Area and setting of Listed Building
- Impact upon AONB/dark skies
- Impact upon residential amenity from use of hard paved areas
In response to questions from Councillors Topping and Ewart, the Senior Planner explained that the mobile kitchen was no longer situated on the site but had been introduced previously to cater for seasonal trade and external events. The Planning Manager affirmed that the use of the facility would be subject to conditions. The Senior Planner further advised that customer usage data was not planning consideration as there was no proposed change of use of the garden. The Planning Manager acknowledged that whilst car parking was seasonally busy along The Street, the Highways response to consultation was that the proposal was unlikely to have any impact on the highway network in terms of vehicle volume or highway safety.
Councillor Gee was concerned that the Parish Meeting had expressed its concerns in 2021 and queried why the retrospective application had taken almost two years to come before the Committee. The Planning Manager advised of the timescale involved in such matters and explained that engagement between Officers and the Applicant had been ongoing throughout the period, culminating in the application before Members.
There being no further questions to Officers, the Chair invited Mr John Cary to speak on behalf of Dunwich Parish Meeting in objection to the proposal. Mr Cary surmised that the Ship Inn at Dunwich was a grade 2 listed historic pub in a Conservation Area within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, adjacent to a scheduled agent monument and a Site of Special Scientific Interest. The Parish meeting had objected because in the absence of both consultation and consent, with only 24 hours’ notice for residents, the site owners commenced work on what was an established Orchard Garden in 2021 using heavy machinery to construct the garden and in so doing erased any archaeology that may have been present. The Parish Meeting were of the view that the development was contrary to the local plan of September 2020 in particular:
- Rural areas should be valued for their heritage assets and tourism and should be managed in a way which would protect the features which made the area attractive as a destination, and
- Developments should support and enhance the vitality of rural communities and enhance the visitor experience whilst protecting and enhancing landscapes, and the natural, built and historic environment. Particularly, protection and enhancement of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, whilst also recognising the value of locally important landscapes; and conservation and enhancement of heritage assets which had been evidenced as the Ship Inn had been designated a heritage asset in the Local Plan due to its intrinsic design value derived from local materials and workmanship representative of a historical or an architectural trend.
The Parish Meeting sought mitigation for the impact and nuisance of the development on residents, particularly regarding parking and the use of the rear access as an overspill car park for staff late into the evening. Mr Cary clarified that the beach car park was not owned by the parish meeting, it was owned by the Dunwich Town Trust and leased to the to the beach cafe for their sole use.
The Chair invited questions to Mr Cary. In response to Councillor Topping, Mr Cary was of the view that the Applicant should make better use of the parking spaces on site, some of which were used for refrigeration units. The Planning Manager countered that such matters were not a relevant consideration. In response to Councillor Ewart, Mr Cary advised that other than the notification of works, there had been no dialogue between the Parish Meeting and the Applicant.
The Chair invited Members to debate the proposal. Councillor Ashdown expressed his satisfaction with the proposal due to the wider economic and tourism benefits it had delivered and proposed approval of the application. Councillors Ewart, Topping and Gee were dissatisfied that the Committee had been presented with a retrospective application, which had not considered archaeological matters nor enabled the Committee to consider materials, landscaping and parking.
In response to Councillor Ewart’s observations on the behaviour of the Applicant, the Planning Manager urged Members to consider the application objectively, in accordance with planning matters only, and cautioned that a retrospective application had the same standing as a full application. Councillor Topping expressed displeasure with the retrospective application and emphasised that had the proposal been considered as a full application, the Members could have sought mitigations for their concerns.
Councillor Pitchers seconded the proposal to approve the application and concurred with Councillor Ashdown that the proposal would provide wider benefit to the local economy and was assured that Highways had stated that the proposal was unlikely to have any impact on the highway network. Having been duly proposed and seconded, the Chair moved to the vote whereupon it was by a majority
RESOLVED
That the application be APPROVED subject to conditions:
1.The development hereby permitted shall accord with the following approved plans/reports: Drg Nos TS/01 Rev A received 18.01.2022; TS/02 and Site Plan received 03.08.2021.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.
2. Within three months of the date of this consent, precise details of a scheme of landscape works (which term shall include tree and shrub planting, grass, earthworks, and other operations as appropriate) at a scale not less than 1:200 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.
Reasons: To ensure that there is a well laid out landscaping scheme in the interest of visual amenity.
3. The approved scheme of landscape works shall be implemented not later than the first planting season following approval of details consented under condition 2 (or within such extended period as the local planning authority may allow) and shall thereafter be retained and maintained for a period of five years. Any plant material removed, dying, or becoming seriously damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced within the first available planting season thereafter and shall be retained and maintained.
Reason: To ensure that there is a well laid out landscaping scheme in the interest of visual amenity
4. External lighting shall not be operated after 21.00 October to April (inclusive) and shall not be operated after sundown May through to September (inclusive).
Reason: In the interests of amenity and to protect the environment and dark skies of this part of the AONB.
5. The hardstanding area where the mobile kitchen/food trailer, named as ‘The Field Kitchen’ is currently sited shall not be used for siting of any vehicle or trailer for the preparation of food and drink, and service to customers, for more than a total of 28 days in any calendar year and this may only commence following the discharge of and compliance with condition 6. At all other times the mobile kitchen/trailer may only be sited/parked on the land, and not in active use.
Reason: the hardstanding area where the trailer is sited is immediately adjacent residential properties and therefore unrestricted, year-round use of the kitchen facilities in the trailer has the potential to cause amenity impact. This condition is necessary as the work subject of this application facilitates the siting of the trailer. In all other respects the condition meets the tests of paragraphs 55 and 56 of the NPPF.
6.Within 3 months of the date of this planning permission or prior to first use of the hardstanding for any catering vehicle/trailer, a noise and odour control/management plan is to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval in writing. Any mitigation measures required are to be implemented prior to first use and thereafter the control/management plan is to be adhered to whenever the mobile food kitchen/trailer is being used for the preparation and service of food and drink.
Reason: the application does not include detail on the noise and odour impact of the use of the mobile food kitchen/trailer, and it is necessary to secure this information in the interest of neighbour amenity.