Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notices of appointment of substitute.

Apologies were received from:

·         Cllr G Czapiewski who was substituted by Cllr L Knight.

·         Cllr N Letch who was substituted by Cllr L Kennedy.

·         Cllr S Clist.

To receive any questions relating to items on the agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.

Note: A maximum of 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

Marc Gouldsworthy referred to Application No 23/00209/FULL

Question 1 - Strategic Policy S1 as laid out in the Local Plan Review Policy 2013-2033 and sustainable development principles refer to environmental impact and protecting and enhancing our environment. As the proposal consists of substantial loss of the existing natural environment replacing it with hard standings and buildings, does the committee consider that the net loss of biodiversity has been mitigated and that as noted on page 15 and clauses S1 l & m of the policy, that it has achieved net gains for nature (bio-diversity net gains and achieved the urban greening factor)?

Question 2 - Does the Committee consider that Policy S1 clause h and Policy S2 clause 2.25, have been satisfied in respect the proposals being sustainable and respect the local character, heritage, surroundings and materials of the surrounding area. That is to say that the designs in terms of scale and aesthetics take into account Bampton’s existing heritage and design of existing properties. Noting that these requirements were heavily pushed and conditioned in the Newton Court development in regard to architecture and size of property and that the proposed development in terms of mass and style is out of keeping and do not mirror the properties in Frog Street and Newton Court.

Question 3 - Strategic Policy S9 has been implemented to protect the environment. Noting that the only ecologic report submitted was highlighted by the author as only considering the existing temporary and brick structures, do the Committee feel adequate ecological reporting and adequate assessments have been undertaken on the full extent of the site and now in the areas of the revised drainage strategy that is proposed to discharge into the watercourse via a headwall satisfy this policy, particularly as there are reports of protected species living in and around the watercourse. Consideration should be given that the report will be nearly 3 years old and the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management note that it would now be invalid and a new assessment by a professional ecologist would need to be undertaken.

Question 4 - Does the Committee consider that the requirements of DM 1 have been satisfied which requires a clear understanding of the site and its constraints to be taken into account, with buildings integrated with the surrounding buildings, with Conservation Area Appraisals and Mid-Devon and Village Character Assessment evaluating the settlement being undertaken (as they do not seem to appear in the documents submitted to date). Also, consideration of the adverse effects on the neighbouring properties and amenity of neighbouring properties in regard to architecture, siting, scale and massing as the current proposals have been considered as they will create privacy issues, as well as the loss of light with adjoining properties.

Also noting that the current proposals do not comply with Building Regulations in respect to Approved Document J and that if constructed as designed would not only be in breach, but it would also incur potential financial costs for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

To record any interests on agenda matters.

Members were reminded of the need to declare any interests where appropriate.

Cllr L Knight made a declaration of interest in accordance with Protocol of Good Practice for Councillors dealing with planning matters regarding Agenda Item 8 - Application No. 20/00876/MFUL in that he was a Ward Member for Cullompton Padbrook and a Cullompton Town Councillor. He was also a Trustee and Treasurer for the Cullompton Community Association Fields.

Cllr S Robinson made a declaration of interest in accordance with Protocol of Good Practice for Councillors dealing with planning matters regarding Agenda Item 8 – Application No. 20/00876/MFU in that she was a Ward Member for Cullompton Padbrook and a Cullompton Town Councillor.  She was also a Trustee and Treasurer for the John Tullock Centre in Cullompton.

To consider whether to approve the minutes as a correct record of the meeting held on 20 August 2025.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 20 August 2025 were agreed as a true record and SIGNED by the Chair.

         To receive any announcements the Chair may wish to make. 

The Chair thanked Richard March, Director of Place and Economy for his support to the Committee, as this would be his last Planning Committee meeting before he left Mid Devon District Council.

To report any items withdrawn from the agenda.

There were no withdrawals from the Agenda.

To consider the planning applications contained in the list.

The Committee considered the applications in the *Plans List.

1.    23/00209/FULL - Erection of 2 dwellings and associated works at Land and Buildings at NGR 295663 122384, Frog Street, Bampton.

In response to public questions the Area Team Leader answered as follows:-

Question 1 Strategic Policy S1 as laid out in the Local Plan Review Policy 2013-2033 and sustainable development principles refer to environmental impact and protecting and enhancing our environment. As the proposal consists of substantial loss of the existing natural environment replacing it with hard standings and building.   Does the Committee consider that the net loss of biodiversity has been mitigated and that as noted on page 15 and clauses S1 L & M of the policy, that it has achieved net gains for nature (bio-diversity net gains and achieved the urban greening factor)?

Answer 1 - As noted in Section 6 of the officer’s report, there will be a loss of some existing biodiversity, however the scheme proposes landscaping which would allow for mitigation and some gains. Condition 8 required the provision of a landscaping scheme, which would provide details of biodiversity enhancements. Due to the date of submission, it would not be necessary to provide the mandatory 10% biodiversity net gain (BNG).   Members would be able to take a view as to whether they considered the scheme was sufficiently harmful and would be able to provide the necessary landscape mitigation and biodiversity gains.

Question 2 - Does the committee consider that Policy S1 clause h and Policy S2 clause 2.25, have been satisfied in respect the proposals being sustainable and respect the local character, heritage, surroundings and materials of the surrounding area. That is to say that the designs in terms of scale and aesthetics take into account Bampton’ s existing heritage and design of existing properties. Noting that these requirements were heavily pushed and conditioned in the Newton Court development in regard to architecture and size of property and that the proposed development in terms of mass and style is out of keeping and do not mirror the properties in Frog Street and Newton Court.

Answer 2 - This question would be one for Members to consider.  The proposed dwellings were large, particularly that on Plot 1, however the site was relatively discrete within the conservation area and townscape.  These matters were addressed in the Committee report.  Whilst the design of the properties were not the same in Newton Court and Frog Street they did have a pallet of materials that included natural stone render similar to those nearby with slate tiles and timber windows.

Question 3 - Strategic Policy S9 has been implemented to protect the environment. Noting that the only ecologic report submitted was highlighted by the author as only considering the existing temporary and brick structures, do the Committee feel adequate ecological reporting and adequate assessments have been undertaken on the full extent of the site and now in the areas of the revised drainage strategy that is proposed to discharge into the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

To consider the discharge of Condition 22.

The Committee considered Application No. 20/00876/MFUL – Discharge of Condition 22 – Land at NGR 302456 107324, Cullompton, Devon.

The Area Team Leader outlined the contents of the report by way of a presentation and highlighted the following:-

·         The condition was imposed by Members of the Planning Committee on 13 January 2021 when planning permission was granted for the construction of the Cullompton Town Centre Relief Road.

·         The wording of the condition outlined in the officer’s report stated that prior to commencement of the development, a scheme for: the configuration, prioritisation, signing and marking of the junction between Meadow Lane and Exeter Road; and the pedestrian crossing arrangements on Meadow Lane to be submitted.

·         The proposal now was a slight widening of the road with the Meadow Lane crossing now having central islands and pedestrian refuge points and the same to be applied to the other junction on Exeter Road, with a pedestrian refuge point and a bollard side to side.

·         A signalised junction was not proposed therefore priority would be to continue to enter into Meadow Lane and signage would direct vehicle users in that direction rather than heading through the town centre.

·         The proposals offered the best route for cost effectiveness, provided better direct traffic through Cullompton and provided safe access.

·         A “puffin” crossing and a “signalised” crossing were considered however it was concluded that a “zebra” crossing would offer the best solution to ensure the safety of pedestrians with additional measures provided on the road to give advance warning to motorists.

Discussion took place regarding:-

·         Making sure the additional measures for motorists were clear.

It was RESOLVED that the discharge of condition 22 be approved.

(Proposed by the Chair)

*List and report previously circulated.

To receive a list of major applications and potential site visits.

The Committee had before it, and NOTED, a list *of major applications with no decision.

The Committee agreed the following:-

1.    25/01282/MFUL - Variation of Conditions 7 and 12 of Planning Permission 24/00506/MFUL (Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 10 affordable dwellings with associated parking, landscaping and other minor associated works) to allow substitution of approved plans to reflect revised cycle and refuse storage locations, landscaping strategy, and improved vehicular access  - Garages and Forecourt at  Watery Lane & Land at Elmore Way & Sunningbrook Road Tiverton Devon– to be considered at Committee as per the report.

2.    25/01232/MFUL - Erection of building to provide cover for existing slurry pit (1,100 sq.m) – Land at NGR 279858 111658 Westcott Dairy Witheridge Devon - to remain as delegated as per the report.

Note:  *List previously circulated.

To receive a list of recent appeal decisions.

The Committee had before it, and NOTED, a *list of appeal decisions.

Note: *List previously circulated.

To receive a report from the Corporate Performance and Improvement Manager on the Performance Dashboard for Quarter 1.

The Group were presented with and NOTED the Performance Dashboard for Quarter 1 2025/26. 

The overall performance was presented in a pie chart which combined the RAG ratings (Red/Amber/Green).  The indicators were presented with the current performance and the annual target to indicate whether or not the Council were on track to meet its target.

The following was highlighted within the report:-

·         The performance dashboard for Quarter 1 aimed to give an understanding of how services were performing that related to this Committee.

·         Any performance measures that were also part of the Corporate Plan were listed in yellow text.

·         Major planning applications determined within 26 weeks and minor and other planning applications determined within 16 weeks were both showing as Amber.

·         The associated targets for these had been reduced from 100%, as it had been last year, to 95% for the current financial year.

·         The Council continued to perform above the national targets in place.

·         The cost of planning appeals showed as Red.  In Quarter 1 costs were awarded relating to the Tidcombe Hall Inquiry. It was a partial award relating to the Council prioritising protection of heritage assets over meeting the need to improve housing supply.

·         Planning fees income (statutory fees) were shown as Red due to the continuing market conditions.

Discussion took place regarding:

·         The quality of Planning Committee decisions and why the Risk Rating was 9.  It was explained that the risk had increased due to the increased challenges for decision making.

·         Planning appeals and planning fees income.

·         Annual targets for planning enforcement.  It was explained that it could be possible to show the number of notices served.

Note: * Performance Dashboard previously circulated