Agenda item

Demolition of St Leonard's Church Hall, relocation of the existing car park and erection of two dwellings (one four bedroom rectory and one five bedroom market unit), and double garages, construction of access (car park and dwellings repositioned and formation of undeveloped buffer zone as shown on amended plans received 25th August 2015 and diverted footpath route shown on amended block plan received 2nd February 2016).

The committee considered the report on application P15/S0941/FUL for the demolition of St Leonard's Church Hall, Prospect Place, Watlington and for the relocation of the existing car park and erection of two dwellings (one four bedroom rectory and one five bedroom market unit), and double garages, construction of access (car park and dwellings repositioned and formation of undeveloped buffer zone as shown on amended plans received 25 August 2015 and diverted footpath route shown on amended block plan received 2 February 2016).

Consultations, representations, policy and guidance, and the site’s planning history, were detailed in the officer’s report which formed part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

It was clarified that the confidential document that had been circulated had been received and read by all members. Members were advised not to discuss the confidential aspects of the document, which were provided as background information.

Tom Bindoff, from Watlington Parish Council spoke in objection to the application. His objections included the following:

·           Loss of major part of green space which had been open to the public for a considerable time.

·           Site is sensitive.

·           Reduction of available car parking at the church.

·           Parish Council have not seen the business case.

Tim Horton spoke in objection to the application.  His points included the following:

·          Inappropriate by scale and design.

·           Loss of public amenity.

·           Issue with car parking.

The committee asked questions of clarification to the speaker.

Rev’d Christopher Evans, Mr John Barton, the church warden, and Mr Jeremy Flawn, the agent, spoke in favour of the application. They included the following:

·           The application represented less than substantial harm to heritage assets.

·           Balance with public benefits.

·           Removal of unsightly church hall, more discreet parking.

·           Sale of private dwelling, funds will be restricted by covenant to maintain and repair church.

·           Increase usage and membership of the church.

·           £1687 per week running costs for church needs to increase income.

·           Improved location of the rectory.

·           Increased facilities in the church.

The committee asked questions of clarification to the panel of speakers.

·          The church hall has been condemned as structurally unsound.

·          Community groups were leaving the church hall as it was dilapidated.

·           Vision for the church to be a prestige venue as well as a community venue. Church has had to make a choice.

·           When the funds are released the church will be able to build the extension for which it has planning permission.

·           The church has only had a limited amount of funding support from parish council of £1000 for the church hall and insufficient grants offered by SODC with unsuitable conditions and therefore were not eligible to keep the monies.

·           The applicant has previously investigated grant funding opportunities from external bodies but these came with conditions which could not be fulfilled.

It was proposed and seconded to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

·           To preserve or enhance character of the conservation area, and historic building.

The committee debated the proposal:

·           It is a matter of balance and compromise.

·           The green space which would be lost is private, not public, land.

·           There are other facilities available in Watlington.

·           No business plan put forward from the church on long term financial sustainability.

Summation.

·           Any financial gain would be short term, the loss of visual amenity and heritage asset would be long term. There appeared to be no business plan.

On being put to the vote, this motion was carried.

RESOLVED

To refuse planning permission in order to preserve the character of the conservation area and the historic building.