Agenda item

Change Of Use from Residential to Hotel (C3 To C1) (Resubmission Including Revised and Additional Information) and Associated Listed Building Consent

The Committee considered a report of the Principal Planning Officer (Easington Area) regarding the change of use from residential to hotel (C3 to C1) (resubmission including revised and additional information) and associated listed building consent at The Castle, The Village, Castle Eden (for copy see file of Minutes).

The Principal Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation on the application which included photographs of the site.  Members had visited the site that day and were familiar with the location and setting.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that since the report was circulated the following updates had been received:

• Information had just been received today that the applicant had sufficient control over the land required for the necessary highways visibility splay works to be carried out.  However, there had not been time to verify this, and an initial inspection of the submitted details suggested there was still uncertainty over the situation.  On this basis, Paragraph 32 of the report should indicate that the applicants had failed to provide evidence that they had a reasonable prospect of carrying out these works.  Similarly, in the absence of further investigation, Reason for Refusal No. 1 in the Recommendation Section of the report remained relevant in its entirety, subject to a change of wording to refer to a reasonable prospect of carrying out the works, rather than sufficient control over the land.
• The proposed lift shaft had been removed from the application and therefore there was no requirement for a bat survey to be carried out as detailed in paragraph 35.
• The Environment Agency had withdrawn its objection to the proposals because the non-mains drainage issue had been resolved.  Therefore, Reason for refusal No. 3 in the Recommendation Section in the report should be deleted.

Councillor Len O’Donnell, local Member, addressed the Committee.  He informed the Committee that the application was part of an ongoing application which had been taking place with amendments for the last two years.  Castle Eden village was an area of outstanding beauty with very narrow streets for vehicles to access the proposed hotel.  He referred the Committee to paragraph 33 of the report which stated that the highway improvement scheme would be deemed to be unacceptable in terms of its impact on the Conservation Area which was contrary to saved Local Plan Policy 22.  He supported local residents in their objections to the application and the recommendations of the planning officers.

Dawn Carter, local resident, addressed the Committee.  She referred to the narrowness of the road in the village and showed photographs of traffic congestion that was occasionally caused by services held at the village church, which resulted in cars parking on the B road.  The village lane narrowed towards the castle gates.

Mr Davies, the applicant, addressed the Committee.  The Castle had approximately 30 rooms and was a landmark of the area, but needed a larger use than at present.  Plans regarding access had been changed to meet the needs of the Council and any trees removed by the visibility splay works would be mitigated by replanting.  For the last 4 years the Castle had been hired for events and parties during which time no complaints had been received regarding traffic or access through the village.  Change of use of the Castle to a hotel would bring with it economic benefits of local producers being used for food supplies, local contractors being employed for building works and economic benefits of tourism to the region.

The Principal Planning Officer replied that although the trees in the vicinity of the visibility splay may be of varying quality, they were in a conservation area and were a significant grouping of mature trees.  Any replanting works would not be of a similar impact.  The frequency of the Castle being hired for private parties and events was not known, whereas the conversion to a hotel would result in regular usage with regular activities in the proposed restaurant and bar areas.

Resolved:

That the recommendations in the report be approved, subject to the changes to Reason for Refusal No. 1 and the deletion of Reason No. 3 as described by the Principal Planning Officer.