Agenda and minutes

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 1 October, 2019 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman welcomed public speakers to the meeting. He also reminded

Members of the Committee that they should not vote on an application if they are not present at the meeting to hear the entire debate on the application.

Councillor MacGregor declared an interest in application 19/01180/FUL, Bakers Park Newton Abbot by virtue of his Executive Portfolio for Sport, Recreation and Culture and being consulted in relation to the project. Councillor Macgregor spoke but did not vote on the application.

Councillors Bradford and Mullone declared a disclosable pecuniary interest by virtue of their land ownership in relation to applications 19/01439/FUL and 18/01276/MAJ.

Councillor Daws declared a disclosable pecuniary interest by virtue of his land ownership in relation to application 18/01276/MAJ.

The Committee considered the reports of the Business Manager – Strategic

Place Development Management together with comments of public speakers, additional information reported by the officers and information detailed in the late representations updates document previously circulated.

This application was withdrawn at the request of the Applicant.

Councillor MacGregor declared an interest in application 19/01180/FUL, Bakers Park Newton Abbot by virtue of his Executive Portfolio for Sport, Recreation and Culture and being consulted in relation to the project. Councillor Macgregor spoke but did not vote on the application.

Public speaker, Objector – Welcomed elements of the application, but raised objections in relation to the Pavilions building on the grounds of: loss of green space; 50 metres from dwellings; refreshment kiosk not needed because there is already a mobile coffee outlet on site; removal of shrubbery; and potential for increased anti-social behaviour.

In response the Business Manager advised that there would be no impact on landscape, and the commerciality of the refreshment kiosk was not a planning matter for consideration.

Comments for Councillors included: the existing car parking spaces are sufficient, it is a “walk to” park, and the proposed increase in spaces is unnecessary and a loss of green space; the pavilion building is unnecessary, footballers are already catered for; the mobile refreshment outlet would be put out of business; the Devon Air Ambulance lighting pole could be better located to avoid disturbance to wildlife; the toilet proposal is welcomed for visitors; the park is popular because it has multiple games facilities with the tennis courts and football pitches; the car park is at full capacity a lot of the time and the additional spaces are welcomed to avoid Stepps Meadow and Old Totnes Road being used for overflow parking; the proposed changing facilities should cater for use of both pitches and not just one; the pavilion and toilets are needed and the additional car parking spaces have been reduced from the original plans; there will be no loss of trees and additional will be planted; the lighting column is only for emergency landings by Devon Air Ambulance; the improvements have been requested by the community for many years; the existing changing rooms are unsuitable for disabled access and it is unviable to being the former toilet building back into use; the proposed toilet facilities will enable visitors, particularly those with children,  to stay at the park for longer; 

It was proposed by Councillor J Hook, seconded by Councillor Keeling and

Resolved

Permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. Development to begin before the expiry of three years from the date of this permission;

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

3. The works shall proceed in strict accordance with the precautions and measures described in the submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal

4. No external lighting shall be installed on, or in association with, the new building or car park, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the planning authority. No floodlighting shall be installed or used in association with the pitch, courts or elsewhere in Bakers Park, except for the air ambulance column and light. The air ambulance light shall be installed and maintained in strict accordance with the submitted details, shall be used only for air ambulance purposes and shall be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56b

Public speaker, supporter – the plans have been amended to be more in keeping with the surrounding dwellings to include height restricted to single storey; reduced footprint; and elevational materials.

It was noted that any issue relating to land ownership and covenants was a civil matter and not a planning consideration; and that new issues of concern could not be introduced at the reserved matters stage.

It was proposed by Councillor Clarance, seconded by Councillor Parker and

Resolved

Permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans;

2. Sample or details of the materials to be used on the external surfaces of the building shall be submitted to the LPA and approved prior to first use;

3. Sample or details of the paving to be used for the patio and path shall be submitted to the LPA and approved prior to first use;

4. Soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved landscaping details and the implementation plan and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved management plan.

5. Permitted Development rights removed for extensions, roof alterations/enlargements and additional windows/doors in the interest of residential amenity;

6. Surface water drainage shall be provided by means of soakaways within the site in accordance with the hereby approved drainage plan. The soakaways shall comply with the requirements of BRE Digest 365.

7. The fence and planting along the southern boundary dividing the site from 17 Heather Close shall be erected/planted prior to the first occupation of the dwelling.

8. The parking area shall be provided prior to the first occupation of the dwelling and retained thereafter for the parking of vehicles.

9. The bin store shall be provided prior to first occupation of the dwelling and retained thereafter in perpetuity for refuse/recycling storage.

10. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved construction management plan.

(15 votes for, 2 votes against and 1 not voted)

Councillors Bradford and Mullone declared a disclosable pecuniary interest by virtue of their land ownership.

The Senior Planning Officer updated the meeting in regard to the officer recommendation at agenda page 59. Condition 13. Additional conditions are recommended regarding bat mitigation and external lighting, and carbon reduction plans, and an informative is recommended highlighting the general duties incumbent on the site’s developers with regard to legally protected species would still be required but would not be a pre-commencement condition. 

Public speaker, objector – speaking on behalf of clients and the Wolborough Residents’ Association objecting on the grounds that the proposal increases the density of development, moves the houses closer to the site boundary with Westlands, and moves the living accommodation to the first floor compromising privacy. A non-material amendment last June, allowed the developer to change the previously consented designs of plots 9 and 11 for houses of a similar floor area but on a smaller and repositioned footprint. This resulted in a new house type, and space for the four houses currently proposed. The three storey houses will be 7 metres from the existing boundary, living rooms have been moved to the first floor with large windows overlooking the existing neighbouring property. The application should be more sympathetic and less dense design that retains a semi-rural quality more in keeping with the surrounding area and particularly the neighbouring property. 

Public speaker, Supporter - The 2014 consent approved 15 four and five bedroom houses on the site. The market has changed significantly since the approval.  The pre-commencement conditions have been discharged from the original planning consent, such as decontamination, at some considerable cost. The current application addresses consequential viability issues by introducing smaller houses which follow the design of the approved units, and would widen the market of potential buyer. The total houses would increase from 15 to 18 houses and make more efficient use of the brownfield site. It does not constitute overdevelopment because the site was expected to deliver 20-22 houses but tree constraints restricted this to 18. In addition the Section 106 contribution was calculated and agreed on 18 houses, £250,000 would be contributed towards affordable housing. Additional contributions to community infrastructure would also be made with approval of the additional 3 houses.

Comments from Councillors included: the development is near a conservation area and near to the Grade 1 Listed St Mary’s Church; changes to the application since its approval includes new house types, living rooms on the upper floor and closer to the boundary, resulting in loss of privacy for neighbours, and change in the character of the site; planning creep, incorrect plans such as the windows on houses 16 and 17; agree with development on Brownfield sites; the market demand is for three bedroomed dwellings not five bedroomed; the site is surrounded by mature landscape boundaries so the site is well screen; and there is merit in a site inspection to assess the impact on the site and neighbouring area.

In response to issues  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56d

Councillors Bradford, and Mullone declared a disclosable pecuniary interest by virtue of their land ownership.

Application 18/01276/MAJ was refused by Committee at its meeting in February 2019, on four grounds, as set out below and at page 70 of the agenda for the meeting. The decision has been appealed and the Inquiry is scheduled for January 2020

The Chairman referred to the report circulated with the agenda at pages 67 to 74, which updated the Committee on the position and agreements made during the course of the first Inquiry. The Chairman suggested that for clarity purposes, the four reasons for refusal be voted on individually.

The Business Manager confirmed that the bat survey work had been undertaken, but the report had yet to be received.

Concern expressed by Councillors referred to the importance of Wolborough Fen, and the suggestion that a further reason for refusal relating to climate change should be included to defend at the Inquiry. The Business Manager advised that an additional reason for refusal added at this stage was likely to be seen as unreasonable by the planning inspectorate, and consequently, it would be highly likely that the Council would have costs awarded against it.

Comments made by Councillors included: an ecological specialist should interpret the results of the bat survey; there are more species of bat at the site than only the Greater Horseshoe Bat; there is insufficient information available at present to conclude beyond reasonable scientific doubt that the proposals would not have an adverse effect; delaying the link road would have a detrimental effect on the air quality, and not be in accordance with the Council’s emergency climate declaration.

The Chairman reiterated the unreasonableness of introducing additional refusal reasons at this stage.

The Business Manager advised that in relation to refusal reason 4, officers acting under instruction from the members, have agreed proposed conditions with Natural England, which would provide suitable protection.

It was proposed by Councillor Patch and seconded by Councillor Bradford that the meeting be adjourned to allow Members to consider if they would like to vote on each individual refusal reason, and not together as set out at agenda page 69.

An amendment was proposed by Councillor Bullivant and seconded by Councillor J Hook that the reasons as set out at agenda page 70, be considered and voted on individually. The amendment was carried by 11 votes for, 7 against and 1 abstention

It was proposed by Councillor Patch and seconded by Councillor Colclough that the Committee adjourn for a short recess. The proposal was carried by 16 votes for and 2 against.

The meeting reconvened and consideration was given to each individual reason for refusal. The reasons for refusal are as follows:

South Hams SAC (Reason 1)

There is insufficient information available at present to conclude beyond reasonable scientific doubt that the proposals will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the South Hams Special Area of Conservation as required under the 2017 Conservation of Habitats and Species  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

The Committee noted appeal decisions made by the planning Inspectorate.