Proposed conversion of and extension to the existing riverview flats building to form 6no. 2-bed apartments with new end staircores and additional storey above.

The application was refused in accordance with the Case Officer’s recommendation, except that the proposed ground 5 for refusal was removed.

(Proposed conversion of and extension to the existing riverview flats building to form 6no. 2-bed apartments with new end staircores and additional storey above.)

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.

She highlighted that, as referred to in the schedule of updates, the officer recommendation had been amended, removing the fifth ground for refusal as set out in the published report relating to the proposed surface water drainage strategy.

.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking for virtual meetings, Mrs J Geyl, a local resident, spoke in opposition to the scheme, as a virtual attendee.  Mr M Andrews, the applicant’s architect, spoke in support of the application as a virtual attendee.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the local ward member, Councillor Stark, spoke on the application.  In summary, he commented that the application would represent a significant improvement to a derelict building in the conservation area, noting the comments of Historic England on this latest iteration of the scheme, provide needed accommodation in the town centre, and cause less than substantial harm. The Town Council had no objection.  Whilst there were some objections, in particular from some nearby residents, there was evidence of broad local support.  He supported the application

The Committee discussed the application.

The Lead Development Manager commented that there was scope for a scheme of a higher quality of design better reflecting the local context to be provided.

The local ward member was given the opportunity to close the debate.  He reiterated that there was much local support for the proposal and would remove an eyesore that may otherwise remain for some time.  The scheme had benefits that outweighed the less than substantial harm. If the Committee was not minded to approve the application, deferral for a site visit would be preferable to refusing it.

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

1.               The proposal with its uncharacteristic scale, architectural form, and materiality and by virtue of the site’s location within the Ross Conservation Area has a detrimental impact upon nearby heritage assets, the character of the streetscape and the setting of the Conservation Area and fails to maintain or enhance the character and appearance of the locality, one that forms a gateway and location to the historic market town of Ross on Wye and is located within the Wye Valley Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  As such the which would be contrary to Policies LD4, LD1, RW1 and SD1 of the Herefordshire Local Plan Core Strategy and the guidance found in Chapters 12 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019. The adverse impacts identified in this regard would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the modest social and economic benefits of the scheme, and the proposal would hence not be representative of sustainable development.

2.               The proposal would result in less than substantial harm to the setting of No.s 11-14 Wye Street and the Masonic Hall which are Grade II listed buildings which is not outweighed by the public benefits of the proposal. The proposal neither conserves nor enhances the setting of the heritage asset and impacts on the public’s ability to experience the heritage asset from vantage points. The proposal fails to accord with paragraph 196 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies LD4 & SS6 of the Herefordshire Local Plan: Core Strategy and policy EN1 of the emerging Ross Neighbourhood Development Plan.

3.         The proposed extensions by reason of their height, scale and bulk and relationship with adjoining buildings would have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining occupiers as a result of a loss of outlook, increased sense of enclosure and a loss of light/overshadowing and as such the proposal fails to accord with Policies LD1 & SS6 of the Herefordshire Local Plan: Core Strategy and policy EN1 of the emerging Ross Neighbourhood Development Plan and the NPPF.

4.         The proposed extensions due to their design, massing and scale would constitute an unsympathetic and over dominant addition to the existing streetscene and as such the proposal fails to accord with paragraph 196 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies LD1,LD4 & SS6 of the Herefordshire Local Plan: Core Strategy and policy EN1 of the emerging Ross Neighbourhood Development Plan.

5.         In the absence of an up-to-date detailed ecological survey as requested including any identified optimum period survey requirements, the Local Planning Authority is unable to assess the potential impact upon protected species, in particular bat species. The proposal is therefore contrary to policy LD2 of the Herefordshire Local Plan – Core Strategy, paragraph 99 of circular 06/2005 and the relevant aims and objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

 Informative:

1.                The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by assessing the proposal against planning policy and any other material considerations and identifying matters of concern with the proposal and discussing those with the applicant. However, the issues are so fundamental to the proposal that it has not been possible to negotiate a satisfactory way forward and due to the harm which have been clearly identified within the reason(s) for the refusal, approval has not been possible.

(The meeting adjourned between 12.07 and 12.15pm)