Change of use of existing public house to a dwelling and erection of a single storey extension to create three bed and breakfast rooms.

Change of use of existing public house to a dwelling and erection of a single storey extension to create three bed and breakfast rooms.

The Development Control Manager referred to the late material circulated at the meeting.

Public Speaking

Speaking on behalf of the Horseshoe Inn Companions, the objector referred to the huge amount of public support, including 150 letters, from people wishing to see the property revert to a public house. Believing in the viability of the pub, the speaker informed the committee that the former business had ceased trading eight years ago when the current owners had bought it with the sole purpose of operating it as a bed and breakfast establishment. The speaker said the owners had produced a large amount of information purporting to prove the non-viability of the business, and that he considered the information to be inaccurate. He also said that he was aware of three businessmen, including two publicans, who had indicated that they were prepared to buy the property to operate as a pub. The speaker referred to the council’s core strategy and of one of it’s policies in retaining community facilities, should they be considered viable. He also referred to the work of the Commission for Rural Communities in ensuring local villages remained sustainable and of the importance of public houses to this work. The speaker said that to claim that the Horseshoe business was lost was pure nonsense and that a bed and breakfast business would be a trivial gain and a great loss to the community.

Speaking on behalf of Dymock Parish Council, the speaker said that the Parish Council had been placed in a unique position as owner of the only other public house in the village, The Beauchamp Arms. The speaker confirmed that the parish council had sought advice from a reputable organisation and had been advised to declare a prejudicial interest because of the ownership of the Beauchamp Arms. For this reason, Dymock Parish Council would not be participating in discussions regarding the Horseshoe Inn application.

The applicant said that she was completely committed to the running of a bed and breakfast business at the Horseshoe Inn and had never wavered from this intention at any time during the past eight years. She referred to discussions with the planning team during the past two years and that she had submitted five alternative proposals to consider, the current application being the proposal that had been suggested to be the most appropriate in meeting the requirements of the council’s policies. The applicant said that she had completed a detailed pub viability test which, she believed, had proved that the Horseshoe Inn was unviable as a pub and that offers to run the business as a pub did not necessarily guarantee that the business would be successful. Due to access, highway and drainage issues, the applicant believed the pub was unable to diversify in order to survive. Combined with falling pub trade, the applicant believed a bed and breakfast business would provide more sustainable opportunities. The applicant confirmed that she did not intend to sell or move from her current home nor did she wish to extend the property.

Committee consideration

Ward member, Councillor Dr Richard Long referred to the in limbo position that might evolve from the situation, should the application be refused. Dr Long noted that the applicant had indicated that she would not sell the property regardless of the outcome of today’s decision and therefore the property was unlikely to revert to a public house, even if unsuccessful in becoming a bed and breakfast establishment. Conscious that the former business had been on the market 18 months prior to purchase and had not been particularly lucrative under the ownership of the former proprietors, Dr Long shared the view that a public house at the site was not a viable option. After seeking a chef’s professional opinion, Dr Long had been advised that the kitchen would be too small to serve food on a commercial basis and could not be extended due to highway and drainage issues. In support of the application, Dr Long believed a bed and breakfast establishment was a plausible option and would fulfil the need for such provision in the area.

Several other members supported the application. They said that they believed too much time had elapsed since the property had operated as a pub and that there was too little evidence to suggest a pub business would be viable. In general, it was felt there was much more scope if the property operated as a bed and breakfast establishment.

Councillor Philip Burford disagreed with this perspective and said that he would be saddened at the closure of any public house. Referring to this particular location, Councillor Burford believed that the property was in a unique position by not being in competition with neighbouring pubs and a good distance from the nearest other property. Councillor Burford suggested that the viability of the pub could be brought about by combining the former pub business with the proposed bed and bed accommodation and food sales. In summary, Councillor Burford believed the premises was a community facility that should be maintained. Councillor Roger Yeates said that he too would be sad to see the loss of the pub, particularly if alternative and other options had not been fully considered.

Vote

Councillor Jane Horne moved and Councillor Grace Bensted seconded the recommendation.

A recorded vote was taken and members,

RESOLVED that the application be authorised planning permission subject to the conditions as detailed in the schedule of applications and to the late material circulated at the meeting.

For (14) Councillors, Grace Bensted, James Bevan, Heather Dalziel, Terry Glastonbury, Jane Horne, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Norman Stephens, Arthur Thomas, David Thomson and Marion Winship.

Abstentions (0)

Against (5) Councillors, Philip Burford, Terry Hale, Len Lawton, Lynn Sterry and Roger Yeates.