Proposed single storey extensions to North Chapel and to north side of tower to replace existing Plant Room, disabled drop-off parking bay and lift enclosure on north-west side of church and glazing of south porch to create draught lobby. Interior alterations to create multi- use venue. Change of Use from D1 class only to D1, A3 and D2 uses.

The application was refused in accordance with the case officer’s recommendation.

(Proposed single storey extensions to north chapel and to north side of tower to replace existing plant room, disabled drop-off parking bay and lift enclosure on north-west side of church and glazing of south porch to create draught lobby. Interior alterations to create multi-use venue. Change of use from d1 class only to D1, A3 and D2 uses.)

The Principal Planning Officer gave a presentation on the application, and updates/additional representations received following the publication of the agenda were provided in the update sheet, as appended to these minutes.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mr V Harnett, of Wigmore Group Parish Council spoke in opposition to the scheme.  Fran Rhodes, Director, Wigmore Centre Community Interest Company) spoke in support.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor CA Gandy, spoke on the application.

She made the following principal comments:

·        She outlined the Church’s distinguished history. However, the building was now reduced to hosting 4 services a year, weddings and funerals. It had no basic facilities.  If it was not to close and become a ruin, innovative plans such as those being proposed were its only hope of salvation.

·        The proposal would benefit the community and safeguard the building.  It would also attract tourists to Wigmore and neighbouring parishes.  Similar projects elsewhere in the country had proved successful.

·        The church’s central location, however, presented a challenge.  It did not have any parking and there were significant parking and traffic issues as outlined in the report to the Committee.  The proposal relied on the school and businesses to provide parking spaces and volunteers would be needed to marshal events to ensure safe crossing of the A4110, pedestrian safety generally, and prevent people trying to park at the church.  The Committee needed to consider if the parking issues had been sufficiently addressed.

·        Refusal would result in further deterioration of the church and lead to it eventually becoming a ruin.

In the Committee’s discussion of the application considerable interest in, and support for, the aspiration of the proposal was expressed, noting also that it had attracted grant funding.  However, there was serious concern about the lack of parking, safety of pedestrians and the potentially adverse impact on the community.  No satisfactory solution had been found to address this concern.

The Transportation Manager commented that improvements could be made.  However, this would require a package of measures.  The parking issue would need to be solved and finance identified for such measures.  There were no current proposals.

It was also observed that there were objections from a range of national heritage bodies and the Parish Council to which weight had to be given.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  She commented that she was keen to safeguard the church but parking issues needed to be addressed and there were differing views on the proposal within the local community.

Councillor Edwards proposed and Councillor Baker seconded a motion that the application be refused in accordance with the printed recommendation.  The motion was carried with 9 votes in favour, 1 against and no abstentions.

RESOLVED: That planning permission be refused for the following reason:

The application promotes the change of use and extension of an existing Grade I listed place of worship to create a multi-use venue allowing for continuation of the existing lawful use, along with A3 and D2 uses.  The potential impacts of the development upon the safe operation of the public highway network have been identified, but the suggested mitigation measures have not been subject to a road safety audit and the local planning authority is unable to form an objective assessment as to their acceptability or effectiveness in mitigating these impacts.

Moreover a number of these measures rely on the incorporation of third party land not forming part of the application site to the effect that officers are not satisfied that long-term and effective traffic management procedures can be maintained. Given the above stated concerns officers have no option but to conclude that the residual cumulative impacts of the development are severe and that the application should be refused accordingly in that it conflicts with the guidance contained within paragraph 32 and with Policies SS4 and MT1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy 2011-2031.

(The meeting adjourned between 10:55 am and 11:03 am)