Agenda item

Full planning permission for the erection of a new Wellness Spa, Bistro, Garden Villas, Garden Rooms, Pavilions and Storage Barns, minor extensions and alterations to the existing Grade II* Manor House, former Stables building and Staff Facilities building, new highway access, internal road and car parking areas, limited demolition and associated works

(amended plans and information September 2021, Archaeological Evaluation Report October 2021 and Amended plans and additional information April and June 2022).

The committee considered application P21/S0343/FUL for full planning permission for the erection of a new Wellness Spa, Bistro, Garden Villas, Garden Rooms, Pavilions and Storage Barns, minor extensions and alterations to the existing Grade II* Manor House, former Stables building and Staff Facilities building, new highway access, internal road and car parking areas, limited demolition and associated works (amended plans and information September 2021, Archaeological Evaluation Report October 2021 and Amended plans and additional information April and June 2022).

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 the meeting.

The planning officer provided the context of the site and explained that this was referred to the planning committee due to the size of the scheme and its departure from greenbelt policy. If the application was approved, it would then be referred to the Secretary of State to issue a direction to identify whether they wish to determine the application themselves. The proposal was over 4000 square metres in floor area and the scheme was designed to provide an upgrade to the hotel and Michelin star restaurant.

The planning officer then provided the detail of existing and proposed buildings on the site masterplan and also highlighted the two new car parking areas. The employee number would go from 176 to 259 and the parking spaces would increase by 160 spaces to a total of 250 parking spaces. The planning officer then explained that the replacement conservatory would extend beyond the existing conservatory. With reference to the bistro, the roof would be clay tiled with the walls clad in green oak. The presidential villa would have Cotswold rubble stone as elevations, as would other buildings with a mixture of clay tiled roofs and flat sedum-roofs.  Within the envelope of the manor house gardens, officers were not concerned with the proposed development. Whilst the application conflicted with policy regarding the greenbelt, there was not considered to be material harm to the openness of the landscape and green belt.

The planning officer then discussed the outer-field, and advised that parking would be valeted, and solar canopies would be located in the visitor parking area. The planning officer illustrated the public footpath and its location on the field. The committee were given an update that neighbouring residents were concerned about the water flows from the site and the potential impact on surface water flooding and biodiversity on nearby areas. The planning officer confirmed that an extra requirement was proposed for the drainage condition which would require a water management plan to address the release of water off-site. A letter of support from the local public bus company was also highlighted in favour of the application, and the officer identified terms for the Section 106 agreement in relation to the subsidy for the local bus service. Officers had requested a continuation of the bus subsidy for five years with a review built in after 3 years and the 3 year period to include 2 years post completion. The County Council had advised that the subsidy should be £175,000 index linked per annum.  The planning officer stated that very special circumstances needed to justify the departure from greenbelt policy and in relation to the harm to heritage assets, the public benefits needed to be substantial. The officer explained that these principally concern the economic benefits, the gain to biodiversity, the improvements to the sustainability of the existing buildings and an elevated target for the proposed buildings and the public bus subsidy.  In summarising the application, the planning officer confirmed that in their view, the application was considered to be acceptable, and subject to conditions and the referral to the secretary of state, the application was recommended for approval.

Steve Harrod, representative of Great Milton Parish Council, spoke in favour of the application. The committee asked the speaker whether he was speaking as a representative of the parish or expressing his own views towards the application as an induvial. The speaker confirmed that he was a chairman of the parish council but was speaking to express his own view. The speaker confirmed that the parish did not have a full agreement on their stance towards the proposed development.

Gwen Harris and Emma Treanor, local residents, spoke in objection to the application.

Sarah Moorhouse and Raymond Blanc, the agent and the applicant respectively, spoke in support of the application. The committee asked Raymond Blanc how he would be involved in the site going forwards, to which Mr Blanc confirmed that he would continue in his current role for two years before changing to a directorate role overseeing the commercial business. The speakers also responded to questions relating to employment and local bus services, confirming that most of the staff lived locally, and that the bus service was subsidised to provide late night public transport from 6am-1am. The committee then asked the speakers on why the parking area was three times the requirement. The speakers responded that there was an existing overflow in parking spaces, and that the application sought to both remedy existing parking issues and provide appropriate parking spaces that would reflect the increased demand that the application would bring from customers. The speaker then responded to an additional question asking if the cookery school was being relocated or closed. The speaker confirmed that they would be having an academy in place, but that this academy would be spread out across the site and would not be in one single confined location.

The committee asked the planning officer for clarification on Historic England’s stance on the application due to the reservations they had expressed. The planning officer responded that correspondence with Historic England confirmed that the amended application, which had a low level of harm, was deemed acceptable by the organisation. A second question to the planning officer sought confirmation on the car park and its location near the existing footpath, and on screening. The planning officer responded to these questions by confirming that the footpath ran along the tree belt, and that screening was proposed to obscure the car park, which would be covered through conditions. In response to other questions from the committee, the planning officer clarified that the replacement conservatory would extend further south than the original plans. In addition, no material harm was expected with reference to the openness of the green belt in this part of the site, but it was accepted that the development had led to a demand for works within the open fields. The car parking was confirmed as being valeted and some of the visitor parking area would feature solar canopies to contribute to green energy production to meet the requirements of policy, and these would be of a maximum height of 2.5 metres.

A motion moved and seconded, to grant planning permission was declared carried on being put to the vote. In accordance with the constitution of the council, the committee had agreed that the vote for this application item be subject to a recorded vote.

RESOLVED: to grant planning permission for applicationP21/S0343/FUL subject to:

1.     The completion of a S106 agreement for the infrastructure identified in the report and the following Conditions, the final drafting of which to be agreed for consistency under the delegated powers of the Chairman of Planning Committee and the Head of Planning, and

2.     Confirmation from the Secretary of State that they do not intend to issue a direction under section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Consultation) (England) (Direction) 2021

Conditions

1.     Commencement three years – Full Planning Permission

2.     Approved plans

3.     Phasing

4.     Archaeology WSI

5.     Archaeology Mitigation and Recording

6.     Tree Protection (Detailed)

7.     Construction and Traffic Management Plans

8.     Levels (details required)

9.     Unsuspected Contaminated Land Condition

10.New Vehicular Access

11.Sample materials required (all)

12.Details Conservatory

13.Details Presidential Suite

14.BREEAM Outstanding and Excellent Ratings

15.Energy Statement – Details Required

16.Energy Statement Verification

17.Ecology and Wildlife Protection

18.Landscape Environment Management Plan

19.Landscaping Scheme

20.Landscaping Management Plan

21.Removal of PD rights for fencing and enclosures

22.Lighting Strategy and Details

23.Green Travel Plan

24.Turning Area & Car Parking

25.Cycle Parking Facilities

26.Electric Vehicle Charging Points (details required)

27.Noise Assessment (external noise & plant equipment)

28.SUDs Scheme Surface Water

29.Surface Water Drainage

30.Foul Water Network Upgrade

31.Foul Drainage details

32.Hours of operation