Agenda item

Cladding of Public House, timber lean-to shelter extension, alterations to porch, two timber pergola seating structures, structure for forecourt sign, trellis fencing on top of stone wall to west boundary, extensions to the rear of the Public House and rear of Smithy Barn and detached hobby workshop and rear 1.8m high close boarded fencing to the northern boundary. (Amended Drawings). Kelstedge Inn, Matlock Road, Kelstedge.

(Planning Manager – Development Management)

The report to Committee explained that a Planning Application had been submitted for various works to the Kelstedge Inn, Matlock Road, Kelstedge and its surrounding site. In particular: (a) Cladding of Public House, (b) Timber lean-to shelter extension, (c) Alterations to the Porch, (d) Two timber Pergola seating structures, (e) Structures for forecourt sign, (f) Trellis fencing on the top of the stone wall to the west boundary, (g) Extensions to the rear of the Public House and the rear of Smith Barn and detached Hobby Workshop, and (h) Rear 1.8 Metre high close-board fencing, to the northern boundary of the site. The report explained that these changes had now been made and were currently in place. The Application has been referred to Committee by Local Ward Member, Councillor W Armitage, who had raised concerns about it.

Planning Committee was recommended to refuse the Application. The report to Committee explained the concerns about specific changes. Officers had concluded that that the cumulative effect of the cladding, porch and timber structures constructed of a variety of materials with differencing finishes had created a cluttered appearance, which was out of keeping with the character of the area and harmed the character of the surrounding landscape. They felt that the Application would reduce the number of parking spaces while increasing the requirement for parking. Officers contended that this would have a harmful impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties by pushing parking on to the highway.

Before Committee considered the Application it heard from Ward Member, Councillor W Armitage, the Applicant, S Oxspring and the Agent for the Application, C Stainton, who all spoke in favour of it. No one spoke against the Application.

Committee considered the Application. It took into account the Principle of Development and the site’s location within the Settlement Development Limits (SDL) for Kelstedge. It considered the relevant Local Planning Policies. In particular, Committee took into account Local Plan Policy SS1 on sustainable development within the District, Local Plan Policy SS9 on appropriate developments within Settlement Development Limits and Local Plan Policy SDC3, requiring developments not to cause significant harm to the character, quality and distinctiveness of the landscape. Committee also considered the provisions of the Ashover Neighbourhood Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) objective that the Planning and Development process should seek to create high quality and sustainable buildings and places.

Members discussed the Application. As part of this they heard about the role which the Public House plays as a facility for the local community. Members also discussed the advice previously offered by the then Planning Case Officer, suggesting that the proposed cladding would be acceptable. Committee was informed of the context for this and the reasons why the officers felt the cladding would not be appropriate.

Members discussed the specific alterations and their impact on the surrounding area. In this context, they considered the impact on parking on the site and received confirmation that only one parking space had been removed. Committee discussed the wooden structures which had been erected and how these had been installed at the time of the Covid-19 restrictions on indoor gatherings. They also discussed concerns raised about the visual impact of some of the changes, including the rear fencing, and whether these concerns could be addressed through the imposition of appropriate conditions.

At the end of the discussion Councillor M Foster and D Hancock moved and seconded a motion to approve the Application on the grounds it in accord with the relevant Local Planning Polices. The motion was put to the vote and was agreed.

RESOLVED -

That the Application be conditionally approved, contrary to officer recommendations.

That the final wording of the conditions to be delegated to the Planning Manager (Development Management).

Reasons

That the Application was appropriate to the scale and design of the Kelstedge Settlement.

That the Development had not harmed the landscape.

That the Development respected the local identity of the surrounding area.