Valerie Scott, Chair of the Neighbourhood Planning Group, writes:-
I have been asked by the Chairman of Bigbury Parish Council to send to you the representations of Bigbury Parish Council to the above applications. The Parish Clerk is abroad at the moment and may not be in a position to send these to you until he returns.
I will be putting similar objections on behalf of the Bigbury Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group directly on to the on the websites.
The applications are in three separate parts, covering Warren Cottage, Bigbury Bay Cafe and the two buildings combined. Following the same pattern, the PC’s representations are as follows;-
Furthermore, I will try to prepare an article explaining the position for parishioners to enable them to write in letters of objection. Although there are very limited reasons that SHDC can give to refuse these applications ie relating to method of demolition and satisfactory restoration of the site I believe the presence of Japanese knotweed would be a reason to prevent any demolition until it has been fully eradicated or satisfactorily treated. The fencing to be left around the site following demolition is wholly unnecessary. It is not specified in the Method Report or shown on the post demolition plans. In fact the post demolition plans show specifically state that the existing vegetation and boundaries are to be retained. It is only in the letter from Ashfords Solicitors that the proposal to retain the fencing is mentioned. This is also wholly unacceptable as the fencing could be left in place for many months if not years as there is no planning approval in place for the redevelopment of this site.
There is no reason why people should not object to the principle of losing a heritage asset and an asset of community value (ACV). The site will retain its ACV status even if the Bay Café is demolished and the lawful use of the site remains as part residential/part Class A3 (café/restaurant).