Agenda item

All Members except Councillor Hemsley stated that they had been lobbied.

The Committee considered the report and the urgent update report of the Head of Planning and Development.

The Development Manager advised the Committee that earlier that day, he had been notified that the Parish Council had submitted an application for the public house to be registered as an asset of community value.  The representative of the Interim Head of Legal Partnership explained that the effect of a building being listed as an asset of community value was that if the property was subsequently to be sold, then it had to be offered to the community before being placed on the open market.  If a listing had been made, and it had not, it would only affect the disposal of the property and it would be an additional material consideration to be taken into account as part of the planning process.

Mr Lenham, an objector, Councillor Mrs Buller of Staplehurst Parish Council, Mr Barraclough, for the applicant, and Councillor Brice (Visiting Member) addressed the meeting.

Contrary to the recommendation of the Head of Planning and Development, the Committee agreed to refuse permission.  In making this decision, Members considered that insufficient evidence had been submitted which demonstrated that the operation as a public house was not viable and it was unlikely to become commercially viable, contrary to saved policy R11 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.  The proposals would also result in the loss of a community facility contrary to saved policy R11 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000, policy SP10 (paragraph 5) and policy SP5 (paragraph 3) of the emerging Maidstone Local Plan and paragraph 70 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  The benefits arising from the long-term use of the building were not considered to outweigh the loss of the community asset.

In addition, Members considered that the proposals would fail to meet Objective 12 of the adopted Staplehurst Neighbourhood Plan which sought to support a strong local economy with good access to jobs and employment opportunities.

RESOLVED:  That permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.   Insufficient evidence has been submitted which demonstrates that the operation as a public house is not viable and it is unlikely to become commercially viable, contrary to saved policy R11 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000.  The proposals would also result in the loss of a community facility contrary to saved policy R11 of the Maidstone Borough-Wide Local Plan 2000, policy SP10 (paragraph 5) and policy SP5 (paragraph 3) of the emerging Maidstone Local Plan and paragraph 70 of the National Planning Policy Framework.  The benefits arising from the long-term use of the building are not considered to outweigh the loss of the community asset.

2.  The proposals would fail to meet Objective 12 of the adopted Staplehurst Neighbourhood Plan which seeks to support a strong local economy with good access to jobs and employment opportunities.

Voting:   13 – For  0 – Against  0 – Abstentions

FURTHER RESOLVED:  That in the event of the application being taken to appeal, the Officers, when defending the decision, should put forward appropriate conditions, including a suitable condition regarding the use of renewable energies.

Voting:  13 – For  0 – Against  0 - Abstentions