Re Planning Application 3/20/0686/FUL Rose & Crown, Aston



Aston Parish Council April 2020 v 3Re Planning Application 3/20/0686/FUL Rose & Crown, AstonDear Sirs,The Parish Council objects to the latest planning application for “the retention of public house and barn. Alterations and improvements to the car park. Provision of 4 residential units of 3-bed and 4-bed with external amenity space, access, car parking, bin storage, landscape buffer and turning facilities.”. As shown in the application the residential units are on part of the land currently occupied by the Rose & Crown Pub, car park and garden. The layout of the proposed development, and in particular the location of the pub car spaces, is likely to adversely affect and limit the operation of the pub and use of the barnThe specific grounds on which the Parish Council object are: Insufficient car parking for residential units Insufficient and unsuitable car parking for the customers of the pubNot enough land allocated to the pub to allow it to cater for the number of customers envisaged and to allow the listed barn to be restored and used as part of the community asset.No evidence has been produced to support the case for the long-term viability of the pub and the site generallyInadequate provision for refuse vehiclesInadequate definition of the roadway fronting the site.The planning application includes a number of incorrect and misleading statements.BackgroundSince closure of the pub by Macmullens in November 2014 the site has been subject to a number of planning applications that have all been rejected.June 20173/17/1491/FUL 3/17/1492/LBCResidential housing in garden and conversion of barn and 2/3 of pub into residential. Micro pub in 1/3 of the building.May 20183/18104/FUL 3/18/1042/LBCAll residential housing in garden, barn and pub. January 20203/20/0093FUL3/20/0094/LBCWithdrawnIn 2019 the first four applications were taken to appeal and in August the Inspector rejected the appeal. It is clear from the Appeal Decisions report that the scheme for the whole site needs to be considered in order to weigh the harm and benefits of any scheme. Therefore, until a viable plan exists for the public house no applications for residential development should be considered.No efforts have been made by the owner to engage the local community in the plans and proposals for the site. All invitations to speak at public meetings organised by the Parish Council have been rejected. Until recently all approaches from a local investment group to buy and re-open it as a community owned pub have been declined or cancelled. Limited discussions have taken place but very little tangible progress has been made.The Inspector considered that the pub was an important community asset and that its loss would not be compensated for by any benefits arising from the proposed schemes – including the scheme which included a micro-pub. Her report included the following:“26. The site is located at the heart of a village which has a large number of social, sport and interest groups. The Rose and Crown has a car park, garden and includes an ancillary building, the Barn, which to my mind adds value to the PH. I agree with the local residents that these features provide opportunities to support the Public House facility.27. The evidence before me suggests that since the PH was closed in 2014, there has been an ongoing commitment to enter into a dialogue with the site owners and explore all options available to them to secure a means by which the PH could be retained as a community pub. 28. However, given the strength of feeling and commitment demonstrated by the local community to retaining this facility, I am not convinced that at this time it has been demonstrated that the existing facility is not needed.30. I conclude that the proposal would result in the loss of an important community facility. It would therefore conflict with the development plan and in particular Policy CFLR8 of the LP, the aims of which are set out above. I also find conflict with paragraph 92 of the Framework which seeks to ensure that planning decisions should guard against the unnecessary loss of valued facilities and services.46. The harm that would be caused to the special interest/significance of the heritage assets and the loss of a community facility, together with the harm identified to highway safety in Appeal A, leads me to conclude that the proposals would conflict with the development plan as a whole.”Recent developmentsIn November 2019 Everard Cole advertised the following:New ‘free of tie’ letting of charming Hertfordshire public house. Prominent location opposite Aston Cricket GroundTraditional Bar Area and dedicated restaurant – c50 coversTrade Kitchen and private accommodationDedicated car parking.A large barn currently used for storage but could be used as an ancillary trade areaAvailable on a 5-year FRI lease.In January 2020 agents acting on behalf of the owners asked for “full and final” offers for the sale of the freehold of the pub. Offers were duly submitted by the village investment group but all meetings were cancelled.In late February the advertisement on the Everard Cole was changed to “Freehold Offers in the region of ?375,000”. The village investment group have again submitted an offer. This site has been registered as an Asset of Community Value by the Parish Council, to date we have not been notified by East Herts that the owner is seeking to sell it. No planning consent should be given for residential development until the applicant provides a clear statement about the future of the pub supported by evidence that a viable scheme has been agreed for a pub to serve the community.It is clear from the Appeal Decisions report that the scheme for the whole site needs to be considered in order to weigh the harm and benefits of any scheme. Therefore, until a viable plan exists for the public house no applications for residential development should be considered.The Parish Council would like to stress that it would support a limited amount of building on the site providing it does not adversely affect the chances of establishing a successful community pub. Other Matters – section 106 moneyIf the planning application for this site is approved, at some stage we would like to see the following:Benington Rd FrontageThe Council are pleased to see that the width of Benington Road is to be increased to 5.5m across the width of the site, a bus layby introduced in front of the pub and 2m wide footway across the front of the site.Landscape BufferThe Design and Access Statement, paragraph 1.1 describes the area to the north of the car park between the car park and house number 01 as a Publicly Accessible Open Space (aka landscape buffer). To ensure that there is no further development, ownership should be transferred to the Parish Council or to a local trust. Aston already has two publicly accessible open spaces and have got a proven system for maintenance and upkeep.Footpath to Village CentreOn the western boundary of the site there is an existing footpath which will link up with the new footway across the front of the site and this will provide much better pedestrian access to the village school, bowls club and housing. This existing footpath is currently very uneven and badly damaged by tree roots, and at one point the width of the path is severely restricted by tree from the Rose & Crown site encroaching into the pathway. We understand that the owner has previously had approval to take down this tree but has chosen not to do so. The application provides some detail on this footpath but further clarification is needed. We would like an obligation placed on the developer to repair and improve the footpath, remove the tree and make it the path suitable for push chairs or wheelchairs to have easy access between Benington Road and the centre of the village. There also needs to be some sort of barrier onto Benington Road to prevent pedestrians accidently stepping out on to the road as visibility to the west restricted by a large tree.Detail to support the objectionsAppendix I ParkingThe Parish Council are very concerned about the limited amount of car parking for both the houses and the pub. Previous applications included a Transport Statement seeking to justify residential parking at the mid level. This application provides no such support. For the reasons noted below we do not think this it is appropriate to provide anything less than the maximum for residential parking (ie 10.5 spaces) For the pub, application of the Parking Standards from the Government Planning Portal for an 80 m 2 bar area would indicate the need for around 27 customer parking spaces plus 2 more the flat above the pub and staff. In the current application 20 parking spaces are identified (Proposed Site Masterplan). 10 spaces PP 1-10 are in the main parking area and OK. PP 11-18 are to the rear of the pub in a small area of land between the pub and the barn. They are accessible only through a very narrow alley between the pub and the barn. The doors to the barn open out onto this narrow alley. The Inspector specifically identified the barn as an integral part of the community asset. If the barn is to be restored a and used as part have the overall facility it cannot be surrounded by are parking and single width road in front of the doors used by 40% of the customers cars. PP11 is in front of the rear door to the pub. Also, this whole area is used for deliveries to the pub including beer barrels. Access to the cellar is through this door to the rear of the pub. PP19 & 20 are on the side of the residential access road. They could be difficult to use and are likely to give rise to conflict between residents and pub customers.Appendix II Incorrect statements in the proposalDesign & Access StatementWe are pleased to see the new plans include “associated access, bin storage, publicly accessible open space and turning facilities”. We assume that the publicly accessible open space is the area marked 7 on the plan included on Page 6 designated “Shared Open Space”. We have made suggestions how this area could be secured for the benefit of the village in our points under other matters. Ownership could be passed to the Parish Council or one of the Village Community Trusts.2.3 It is not clear what is planned for the area in front of the pub. The Site Location Plan shows all this area in yellow and the whole of the frontage to the pub as belonging to highways. The plan on Page 6 of the design and access statement shows area 13 as a bus lay by and passing space but gives no dimensions. The area to the side of the pub is very small for the garden of a Village Pub – the extended area of parking behind the pub encroaches on the garden and the front borders a very busy road with poor visibility to the East. This could be greatly enhanced by designating area marked 7 as a pub garden.”“The current pub car park will be enhanced significantly”. The parking for 10 cars will be improved but the other 10 spaces will be in difficult to access areas, blocking exits from the pub or in areas where turning will not be easy. The layout of these spaces will restrict delivery vehicles and impact on the usability of the listed barn. 2.3 also says the site is “within the village with ample on-street parking capacity”. The opposite is true, Aston village is not well served by public transport – this is clearly illustrated by the current high level of car ownership. The village already suffers from severe parking problems. Benington Road is a very busy narrow through-route where on road parking is impossible and the housing area behind the site (Brookfield) regularly has cars parked on the grass verges and pavements (see photos 6 & 7 on page 9 – the grass verges are full of cars every evening) . The Parish Council are repeatedly asked to do something about parking. We have sought help from the police and the County Council but no solutions are forthcoming.2.5 Planning History includes details of previously or withdrawn applications. It fails to mention that the first 4 applications were appealed and the inspector turned down the appeal as she felt the pub and barn were an important asset for the community. 3.1 Development strategy. “The purpose of making this application is to promote the future prosperity on the pub and the benefits which come with it”.The Village Investment Group have been trying to engage with the owners to talk about a purchase of the pub for over 2 years. It has only been during the last few weeks that any discussions have taken place and even now the agents acting for the owners have been unable to answer simple questions or specify exactly what is for sale. For example, in April the agents responded by asking the prospective purchaser “Given your uncertainty regarding the boundaries, would you be able to provide a plan of where you envisage boundary being” 4.1 ConsultationAs previously stated,since 2017 no efforts have been made by the owner to engage the local community or Parish Council in the plans and proposals for the site. All invitations to speak at public meetings organised by the Parish Council have been rejected.4.2 The schedule of accommodation calculates the maximum residential parking requirements as 10. The standard supplied to us by East Herts shows that 2X3 bedroom and 2X4 bed room should have a maximum of 11. Of the spaces allocated, the 2 allocated to the 4-bed house (C-1) look very difficult to use. If the other parking spaces are occupied any car leaving the property would have to reverse a considerable distance. 20 spaces is an inadequate number to make the public house viable and as already stated 50% of them will be difficult or safe to use 6.3 Design rationale We do not agree that the application retains the maximum amount of green space and existing trees. The owner has already felled many of the trees in the garden and a large willow tree that was to be a centrepiece of one of the earlier planning applications was felled in 2019. 50% of the parking for the pub is difficult to use, block entrances and is potentially dangerous. We do not agree there is good separation of parking spaces. Given the limited parking for the housing there will inevitably a spill over into the pub parking, particularly PP19,20. Parking for the Public House – in accordance with the Transport Statement. There is no Transport Statement included.Connectivity – what is planned for the footpath on the western boundary – please see out section 106 request.6.7 Residential Standards – see previous comments on residential parking. The comment about parking for the micropub seems to be copied from another application and is not relevant.6.8 Pub Frontage“The front of the site will have generous planting beds”. We need to see further details on road widths and foot way across the front of the site. Our measurements suggest that the site plan is not accurate. To achieve the stated road width and footway the car park will need to be moved further into the site, without the introduction of generous planting beds.The communal garden adjacent to the pub will be small as it is situated to the east of the pub will get very little sunshine. 6.10 Sustainability. Refuse Collection vehicles, deliveries, emergency services and furniture removal will find it difficult to enter the residential area, turn around and exit without using the pub car park. Deliveries to the pub will be severely restricted by the customer parking area. Conflicts will inevitably arise.Schematic Plan on Page 62. Public House car parking – the plan clearly shows the limited access to the 8 spaces behind the pub. The 2 on the residential access road are likely to cause problems.6. There are no gated communities in Aston and the Parish Council do not want to see any.7. Shared open space to be secured for wider village use.8. If all 8 open area residential parking spaces are full any extra cars will be unable to turn without reversing into the pub parking.13. Details are required on the bus layby and detailed plans for the whole of the site frontage and road widths.14. Details are required on the proposed improvements to the footpath. Appendix III Future Viability of the PubThe planning application makes a number of references to the future of the pub.Design & Access Statement2.3 – the Existing pub building will remain as existing and will re-open - It will continue to offer all the facilities commonly associated with a village pub - An area of the garden will be retained for use - The barn area will remain unaltered and boundary hedges and fencing will be provided -Any application and design proposal will be subject to full consultation with the Parish Council3.1 “ The purpose of making this application is to promote the future prosperity of the pub and all the benefits that come with it” The view of the Parish Council is that this planning application does nothing to support this statement. In nearly 4 years of ownership the owner has:i. Failed to find a tenant for the pub, ii Made very little progress in trying to find a buyer, iii Reduced significantly the garden area for the pub leaving it with only a very small area,iv Placing boundaries tightly around the listed barn limiting the future potential of it v Many of the proposed parking spaces are difficult to access, conflict with areas for deliveries and are likely to result in future problems with the residents. 4.1 This correctly states the Parish Council Policy – the Planning Application does not take these policies into account.The Council is concerned that very few of the points are actually being addressed:The last communication the applicant has had with the council was in 2016The garden and the car parking have been reduced to such an extent that it will limit the number of potential customersThe Parish Council Policy requests “Sound & detailed evidence to demonstrate there is a very good chance that the pub will remain viable over the long term” - No evidence has been provided.The listed barn is to be surrounded by parking spaces and the boundaries with the residential development are too close to allow restoration, conversion and use as an extra amenity for the pub.Until very recently, no attempt has been made by the applicant to engage with the village investment group.Appendix IV – Benington Road Frontage.The application commits to a 5.5m roadway “in front of the existing pub building” (Transport Assessment, section 4.2.3).It is important for traffic flow in the village that the commitment should be for 5.5m across the full site frontage.The submitted plans do not correctly represent the position of the necessary road line. From our measurements, a 5.5m wide road will be 1 metre closer to the pub than shown in the submitted plans. This impacts the car park for the pub, which when next to a 5.5m roadway, cannot be in the position shown.Given that the pub car park is set at the minimum allowed dimensions, it is important to have an accurate plan of the site, and we urge that an accurate representation of the roadway planned is a condition for review of any planning application and associated documents.The topographical survey fails to show the road edge opposite the site, only showing the close boarded fence at the top of the existing bank. This road edge is determined by a steep bank with hedge and trees, which would prevent any widening at this side.All of these points need to be addressed before any planning application is approvedAppendix V – Shared Open SpaceThe open area of land between the westerly pub car park and house no. 01 i is referred to in the Design & Access Statements as “publicly accessible open space” (Para 1.1) , “Landscape buffer to the residential area” Para 2.3, “Shared Open Space” Number 7 on the key to the schematic on page 6.The view of the Parish Council is that this should be protected from future development by having the ownership transferred to some form of community trust. Aston already has the Centre Field and the Village Hall playing field which both demonstrate that land can be successfully managed for the benefit of the community. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download