Controversial plans to turn a village pub which dates back 500 years into a home have been recommended for refusal.

Members of Mid Suffolk’s planning committee will meet on Wednesday to discuss plans to turn the Angel Inn, in Debenham's High Street, into a home.

The plans for the pub, which stopped trading in 2019, were initially discussed and refused by members of the committee in March 2021 due to the applicant not having submitted enough evidence to prove other sites were not available or that any alternative employment use could not be found for the pub.

In February the following year, an appeal was also dismissed by the planning inspectorate.

There has been significant disagreement between the developer, Stacey Paine, and the wider community throughout the course of both proposals.

Although Mrs Paine states the Angel’s lack of viability as a pub can be proven by the lack of interest while it was on the market, for close to seven months, the local representative, councillor Teresa Davis, says this was not enough time.

Similarly, both the applicant and the community stated the other side was not co-operating to find a proper solution for the site.

Ms Davis said: “At no time has serious communication taken place between the owner and the community group with the aim to come to an agreement of purchase.

“I feel that as the owners are not entering into a dialogue with the community group.”

A total of 58 objections were submitted to keep the pub, which dates back to the mid-1500s, including a formal objection from Debenham Town Council.

One of the objectors said: “Debenham has a vibrant community and an array of shops and businesses which are well used by the those in the village as well as beyond.

“Pubs are always a way for communities to gather for all kinds of events and aid in keeping the community spirit.

“With the expansion of Debenham, new homes being built, an additional pub alongside the two in the village would be a great asset and would be well used.”

In light of these objections, the officer’s report concluded there was ‘reasonable potential’ for the building to remain as a pub or some other community facility.

It added: “[The proposals] would result in the loss of a valued community service and facility and employment site, in an accessible location, with no material reason evident to justify departure.”

The proposals are recommended for refusal.