Agenda and minutes

It was proposed by Councillor Goodman-Bradbury and seconded by Councillor Nuttall that Councillor Haines be elected Chair of the Planning Committee.

A vote was taken – see attached. Some votes were not picked up due to technical issues.

Resolved

Councillor Haines be elected Chair of the Planning Committee.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting.

It was proposed by Councillor MacGregor and seconded by Councillor Parker that the minutes be agreed as a correct record.

A vote was taken – see attached. Some votes were not picked up due to technical issues.

Resolved

That the minutes be agreed as a correct record.

If Councillors have any questions relating to predetermination or interests in items on this Agenda, please contact the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

Councillor Parker declared an interest in application 20/00647/MAJ due to his association with neighbours. He did not speak or vote on this item.

It was proposed by Councillor Haines and seconded by Councillor Parker that Councillor Goodman-Bradbury be elected Vice-Chair.

A vote was taken – see attached. Some votes were not picked up due to technical issues.

Resolved

That Councillor Goodman-Bradbury be elected Vice-Chair.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application to the Committee.

Public Speaker, Supporter - Spoke on:

·         Minimal impact

·         Focus on appeasing ecological concerns

·         High quality and well-proportioned design

·         Statutory consultants accept the proposals

Comments from Councillors included:

·         Parish Council has some concerns regarding overdevelopment

·         No planning reasons for refusal

It was proposed by Councillor Haines and seconded by Councillor Nuttall that permission be granted as set out in the report.

A vote was taken – see attached. Some votes were not picked up due to technical issues.

Resolved

That permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.    Standard time limit

2.    Accord with plans

3.     Protected Tree watching brief

4.    Adherence to measures set out in Ecology Statement

5.    No external lighting

6.    Provision of Bat boxes

7.    PD removal – openings in south elevation & roof extensions – neighbour amenity

8.     Access/parking complete & EV Ready prior to occupation

9.    Securing delivery of enhanced insulation and energy efficient measures as per updated Design and Access Statement

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application to the Committee.

It was proposed by Councillor Parker and seconded by Councillor MacGregor that permission be granted as set out in the agenda report.

A vote was taken - see attached.

Resolved.

1.    Development to commence within 3 years.

2.    Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings.

3.    Undertake precautions and recommendations of the ecology report.

4.    First floor windows below 1.7m from ffl shall be obscure glazed

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application to the Committee.

Public Speaker, Supporter – Spoke on:

·         Relieve pressure on street

·         Neighbouring properties have similar parking facilities

·         Guests are encouraged to travel by train

·         Use of electric parking station and solar panels

·         Design is similar to other properties in the area

Comments from Councillors include:

·         Concerns over parking

·         Off road parking in area refused by Committee before.

·         Concerns over wall and pavement

·         Contrary to policies S1, S2 and WE8

·         Detrimental to the characteristics of the area.

·         No objections from Town Council

·         Improved space

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that he could find very little information on parking area applications on Combe Vale Road. He also advised that the planning system doesn’t control which vehicle would be used in the parking space, and that compared to elsewhere in Devon the road is not overly narrow.

It was proposed by Councillor J Hook and seconded by Councillor Clarance that permission be granted as set out in the report.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved

That permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.    Development to commence within 3 years.

2.    Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings.

3.    Undertake precautions and recommendations of the ecology report.

4.    The installation / commissioning of solar panels and EV to be carried out.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application to the Committee.

Public Speaker, Supporter – Spoke on:

·         New buildings are single storey and so not visible to the church

·         Attractive fit for setting

·         Planning inspector did not consider the impact on Belle View as a reason for refusal

Comments from Councillors include:

·         Negative impact on amenities

·         Contrary to Kenton Neighbourhood Plan policies KBHE1 & 2 and K ENV3, and Teignbridge Local Plan policy WE8

·         Increased footprint from previous application

·         What material will be used in the application?

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that slate would be used for the roof and that a sample would be provided to ensure the quality of the material.

It was proposed by Councillor J Hook and seconded by Councillor Haines that permission be granted as set out in the report.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved

That permission be granted subject to the following conditions.

1.    Standard 3 year time limit for commencement of development;

2.    Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans;

3.    Prior to its installation, a sample or details of the slate to be used on the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority

4.    The building shall not be occupied at any time other than for purposes ancillary to the residential use of the host dwelling

Councillor Parker declared an interest in application 20/00647/MAJ due to his association with neighbours. He did not speak or vote on this item.

The Principal Planning Officer presented the application to the Committee.

Public Speaker, Objector – Spoke on:

·         MG5 status of grassland

·         Ecological value of site

·         QC opinion

·         Similar case in North Devon

·         Application is against local plan

Public Speaker, Objector – Spoke on:

·         Increased CO2 emissions

·         MG5 grasslands

·         Ecological impact cannot be covered by bat and bird boxes

·         Declaration of climate emergency

A statement was read out in place of an additional supporting public speaker. Points covered include:

·         Housing association has provided similar successful schemes in the area

·         Strong demand for affordable housing

·         High build quality

·         Marketed to local families

·         Close to bus routes

·         Low carbon air source heat pumps

Public Speaker, Supporter – Spoke on

·         Principle of development

·         The application is for reserved matters

·         Retention of some grassland

·         Ecological buffer zone

·         High quality and affordable housing

·         Compliant with policies including S2

Comments from Councillors include:

·         Declaration of climate emergency

·         Negative impact on ecology

·         Not enough time to consider all documents

·         Buffer zone is too small

·         MG5 grasslands

·         Biodiversity loss

·         Loss of trees

·         Not enough site inspection notice

·         Site untouched for 100 years

·         Flood risk

·         Poor visibility

·         Objections of Town Council

·         Lack of drainage plan

·         Lack of solar panels

·         Good reputation of developers

·         No administrative error

·         Grasslands mentioned by inspector

·         Climate emergency declaration came after the previous decision

·         High quality grassland

·         Non approval recommended in some areas

·         Lack of ecological audit

·         Request for another site visit

·         Poor access

·         Grassland issue may not have been discussed in the past including at site inspection

The Principal Planning Officer advised the Committee that the site has no special designation and that protections would come from becoming an SSSI, however even planning permission can still be granted. He also advised that protection should’ve been sought during the local plan or during the appeal.

It was proposed by Councillor MacGregor and seconded by Councillor H Cox that decision be deferred until the next meeting. Another site visit would also be held.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved

That decision be deferred until the next meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application. He also updated the Committee, noting a drainage condition, 4 parking spaces which would be EV infrastructure ready, and the cycle parking condition.

Public Speaker, Objector – Spoke on:

·         Overly domineering/ large

·         Loss of privacy

·         Overlooking

·         Not in keeping with character of area

·         Presumptuous to assume guests will not stay in room

·         Carbon increase

·         Mental health impact

·         Effect on parking

Public Speaker, Objector – Spoke on:

·         Contradicts policy EN1

·         Design is not in keeping with the town, better design in Paignton

·         Recent bankruptcy proceedings by Travelodge

·         Construction of additional housing would provide more jobs

·         More suitable locations elsewhere

Comments from Councillors include

·         Need for a new hotel

·         Parking in cattle market

·         Increase in tourism and spending

·         Low carbon project

·         In proximity to public transport and entertainment

·         Parking lost will be replaced

·         Use of Air source heat pumps and solar panels

·         Limited use of carbon materials

·         Energy efficient lighting

·         EV charging stations

·         Current car parking is unattractive

·         Uncertain on design – the Principal Planning Officer advised that the building is not as dark as it appeared on the CGI concept

·         Positive use of town centre space

·         Opinions on the design are subjective and vary

·         Only 6 windows could be considered overlooking

·         No conditions can be included which restrict times of occupation of rooms – this was also clarified by the Principal Planning Officer

·         Loss to parking will only be temporary

·         Building design is good compared to the multi storey car park and other surrounding buildings

·         Premier inn still has spaces

·         Building is not attractive

·         Sun may be blocked from nearby houses

·         Loss of theatre may discourage tourism

·         Commercial need

·         It is up to Travelodge to determine commercial viability

It was proposed by Councillor J Hook and seconded by Councillor Parker that permission be granted as set out in the agenda report.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved

That permission be granted subject to the following conditions.

1.    Commencement within 3 years

2.    Works in accordance with the approved plans

3.    Materials samples to be submitted and approved

4.    Hard surfacing details to be submitted and approved

5.    Works in accordance with the Flood Risk Assessment

6.    Zebra crossing to be installed at grade to allow overland waterflow

7.    Unsuspected contamination management

8.    Construction Management plan including noise control measures to be submitted and approved

9.    Noise, vibration and odour report to be submitted and approved. Any necessary mitigating measures to be carried out prior to first occupation

10. Lighting plan to be submitted and approved

11. Operating terms to be submitted and approved including timing of deliveries and waste collections

12. Swift nesting facilities to be integrated into the building; details to be submitted and approved

13. Parking to be provided prior to occupation and thereafter retained

14. Two electric vehicle (EV) charging points and four spaces that are EV infrastructure ready to be made available prior to occupation and thereafter retained

15. Cycle parking provision prior to first occupation and thereafter  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49f

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the TPO.

Councillor Dewhirst, the ward member, spoke on this application. He declared an interest due to being the director of a nearby caravan site.

Comments from Councillors include

·         Planning permission has been granted for lodges in the area

·         Woodland has high amenity value

·         Trees had almost been cut down previously

·         What will happen to the trees where the lodges will go?

In response to member’s comments, the Principal Planning Officer clarified that officers will determine the retention of trees in the discussed area, and that he would discuss retention with the tree officer.

It was proposed by Councillor Haines and seconded by Councillor MacGregor that the TPO be approved in a modified form.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved

The District of Teignbridge (Ross Park Caravan Park) Tree Preservation Order 2021 is confirmed in a modified form.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the TPO. He explained that there was a class Q application that had permission on site, but the trees were at risk and that the site had new owners.

Comments from Councillors included:

·         The line of trees is very visible and would provide a visual amenity to an approved application in the area

It was proposed by Councillor Haines and seconded by Councillor MacGregor that the TPO be approved in an unmodified form.

A vote was taken – see attached.

District of Teignbridge (Doveteign no. 3) Tree Preservation Order 2021 is confirmed unmodified.

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the TPO.

Public Speaker, Objector

·         Agricultural Officer did not inspect the trees individually

·         Tree survey of area won’t be undertaken by Council

·         Appendix 1 does not appear in 2012 regulation

·         Life expectancy and viability is wrong in report

·         Ash dieback in trees

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that the Agricultural Officer is well qualified and would have taken on board what he had seen on site.

Comments from Councillors include:

·         Concerns about leaving trees unprotected

·         Ash dieback trees can be removed subject to TPO procedures

It was proposed by Councillor MacGregor and seconded by Councillor H Cox that the TPO be approved in a modified form.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved

The District of Teignbridge (Land around Saffron Court) Tree Preservation Order 2021 is confirmed in a modified form

The Principal Planning Officer introduced the application.

Comments from Councillors include:

·         Lack of planning permission

·         Caravan is contrary to local plan

·         Will we give them a period of notice? – The Chair clarified that they would receive one.

·         Is the use as a restroom and livestock a legitimate use of the site?

·         The original occupants of the caravan who were using it for these reasons are no longer present.

The Principal Planning Officer advised the committee as to what is considered a caravan and that if there is a change of use for the caravan then it must attain planning consent.

It was proposed by Councillor Peart and seconded by Councillor Haines that the enforcement notice be issued as in the report’s recommendation.

A vote was taken – see attached.

Resolved that

1.    An enforcement notice be issued; and

2.    In the event of the notice not being complied with, authorisation be given to take further action as necessary including proceeding to prosecution.

The Committee noted the appeals made by the Planning Inspectorate