Agenda and draft minutes

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

Apologies were received from Cllr G Duchesne with Cllr J Downes substituting and Cllr N Letch with Cllr L G Kennedy substituting.

Cllr M Jenkins confirmed he would be late attending.

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.

Chris Howard – referred to Application No. 24/01618/FULL and asked the following questions:-

Q1: Are Members aware of Devon County Council’s guidance notes on Sustainable Drainage Systems? Section 9, ‘Requirements for planning’ states the need for consideration of drainage at the earliest possible stage. It also suggests that a major development (10 houses or more) should receive greater scrutiny. Here we have two developments of five houses ie 10, with obvious collaboration and shared drainage strategy.

‘Sustainable Drainage System – Guidance for Devon (2023)’ states that a discharge of a condition should only be approved for a development if there is a clear maintenance schedule for the attenuation tank. I have not seen this schedule on the mid Devon portal.

Q2: Bearing all of this in mind, does the Council believe that this development is following best practice as laid out by Devon County Council in their document ‘Sustainable Drainage System – Guidance for Devon (2023)’?

Responsible development

Q3: Are Members aware that when the plans to run the pipes across our properties first appeared on the Mid Devon portal, neither us nor our neighbour had been approached by the developer. We had a tip off from a neighbour. Last summer, we received phone calls from South West Water, giving 7 days’ notice of a proposed site visit to our gardens. We had not agreed to this and no planning permission had been approved at this stage.  We also received an e-mail from one of the developers suggesting that we should cooperate with them and get a better deal because South West Water will ultimately make a requisition and come and, to quote, ‘bash a trench’ through our gardens. There also appears to have been no attempt to redesign the number or layout of the houses to accommodate an alternative drainage strategy.

Q4: Does the Committee believe this is the trademark of responsible and considerate development?

Connection to adjacent development

Q5: Are Members aware that the drainage will connect to the adjacent development 19/00914/FULL. We did not object to this application in the first instance because our properties were not directly impacted. However, retrospective planning meant the pipes were re-routed to come across ours and our neighbour’s gardens. At this point we had no formal right to object which seems extremely unreasonable. We are told that our only way to object to this adjacent development is via a civil action. 

Q6: Will the Committee support us in obliging the developers of 24/01618/FULLand 19/00914/FULL to look again at the collaborative design of the whole site with a view to keeping drainage off third party land?

Stephanie Howard – referred to Application No. 24/01618/FULL and asked the following questions:-

Attenuation tank

Q1: Are Members aware that the attenuation tank is just shy of the volume of Tiverton swimming pool, (21 x 9 x 1.5 metres)? This will be located within a few metres of ours and our neighbours’ boundaries.  Who exactly will be responsible for the regular maintenance of this tank  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

To record any interests on agenda matters.

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

Cllr S Clist made a declaration in accordance with Protocol of Good Practice for Councillors dealing with planning matters regarding planning application numbers 24/00840/FULL and 24/01618/FULL as he had received communications.  For Application No. 25/00205/NMA he was the Cabinet Member for Housing, Assets and Property Services and this fell within his portfolio and confirmed he had no involvement in this application.

Cllr J Downes made a made a declaration in accordance with Protocol of Good Practice for Councillors dealing with planning matters regarding planning application number 24/00840/FULL in that he had received email correspondence from an objector.

To consider whether to approve the minutes as a correct record of the meeting held on 12 February 2025.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 12 February 2025 were agreed as a true record and SIGNED by the Chair.

         To receive any announcements the Chair may wish to make. 

The Chair reminded the Planning Committee of a Members Briefing taking place on Thursday 27 March, 2.00pm at Phoenix House regarding Tiverton Eastern Urban Extension Area B and encouraged all Councillors to attend in person.

To report any items withdrawn from the agenda.

There were no withdrawals from the Agenda.

To receive a report from the Corporate Performance and Improvement Manager on the Performance Dashboard for Quarter 3.

The Group were presented with, and NOTED, a slide * showing the Performance Dashboard for Quarter 3 2024/2025.  The following was highlighted within the report:-

·         The overall performance was presented in a pie chart and combined RAG (red, amber, green) ratings from both performance and finance measures to indicate overall performance.

·         Major planning applications determined within 26 weeks and minor and other planning applications determined within 16 weeks were both shown as amber which were set against an in-house target of 100% rather than national targets of 60% and 80% respectively.

·         There was lower planning income in the financial year due to the depressed housing market which carried through to the discretionary planning fees which also showed as amber.

·         The income for discretionary fees was projected to finish at only £3000 behind target for the year.

Discussion took place regarding:

·         The cost of planning appeals – it was explained that no costs were currently showing against this measure.

Note: * Slide previously circulated.

To consider the planning applications contained in the list.

The Committee considered the applications in the *Plans List.

1.     24/00840/FULL - Erection of a building for machinery and equipment storage at Hooper Services (South West) Ltd, Crediton, Devon. (00:24:30)

The Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of a presentation and highlighted the following:-

·       The application had been called in by the Ward Councillor due to: overdevelopment of the site; possible illegal use of the site; development in a floodplain; and environmental impact.

·       The building required additional storage for equipment and machinery to be kept dry and safe from theft with the benefit of also helping to tidy the area.

·       The application was submitted in June 2024 and during consideration of the application Planning Officers had worked with the Applicant and the Agent to proactively negotiate amendments and agreements.

·       The key considerations raised by objectors and Crediton Town Council were issues relating to flood risk. The Environment Agency initially objected on the grounds of insufficient risk assessments.

·       Following a revised Flood Risk Assessment the Environment Agency confirmed they had no objections provided it was built in accordance with the updated Flood Risk Assessment and associated planning drawings.  They were satisfied that there would be no risk to third parties and that the area could be considered as Flood Zone 3a for this development.

·       The flood risk assessment confirmed that precautions of flood resilient measures should be taken as recommended by the Environment Agency, which included that all ground floor construction should be a flood resistant material and all electricity power supply cables should be downwards fed.

·       In order to address concerns raised by the community a condition had been recommended by the Public Health Officer that no machinery should be operated except during the hours of 7.30am-7pm Monday-Fridays or 8.00am-1pm on Saturdays and not at all on Sundays or bank holidays all of which had been agreed with the Applicant.

·       There were a number of conditions recommended to secure tree protection measures and additional planting should be undertaken.

·       Concerns had been raised regarding the impact on the highways network. The County Highways Authority visited the site and raised no objections, they also confirmed that a figure had been taken from TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) database and this showed there would not be a severe impact on the highways network.

Discussion took place regarding:-

·       The type of tree used when planting for screening as the Committee felt that Leylandii would grow very tall and quickly outgrow the screen effect and were concerned about the future management and maintenance of the trees.

·       The preferred use of a more sensitive species to be planted.

·       The use of water butts and whether they would overflow – it was explained that they would be fitted with an overflow that would discharge onto the grass bank.

·       Concerns regarding flood risk to the wider area.

·       The colour of the material being used – it was explained that by using green cladding it would blend into the countryside better than the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.

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.     24/01847/MFUL  - To come to Committee – no site visit was required.

2.     25/00141/MARM - To remain delegated as per the report.

Note:  *List previously circulated, copy attached to the minutes.

To receive a list of recent appeal decisions

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

Note: *List previously circulated, copy attached to the minutes.