Venue: Phoenix Chamber, Phoenix House
Contact: Sally Gabriel Member Services Manager
Link: audio recording
No. | Item |
---|---|
APOLOGIES AND SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS To receive any apologies for absence and notices of appointment of substitute.
Minutes: Apologies were received from Cllr J L Smith. |
|
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME 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.
Minutes:
Mr Pilgrim referring to Item 1 on the Plans List (Red Linhay) stated that the officer’s report seems to accept that the applicant's information is correct, I ask you to consider whether the officers recommendation is motivated to shift the focus of challenge. The application depends on an Environment Agency permit, if the Environment Agency refuse the permit and the scheme is operated without a permit the applicant would be in breach of the Environment Agency. If you refuse permission it is likely that an appeal will lead to costs, the credibility and diligence of the officer will be judged.
Mrs Punnett referring to Item 4 on the Plans list (Edgeworthy Farm) stated that the Lake's had been farming Edgeworthy for many generations. Agriculture has continued to change and farmers have had to adapt with the demands for food and animal welfare law. Edgeworthy have been milking dairy cows for many years but with TB and falling milk prices there is a need to diversify. The plan is to produce quality free range chicken and this will form a vital part of Edgeworthy continuing through the generations.
Mr Williams again referring to Item 4 on the Plans List (Edgeworthy Farm) stated that he wanted to know if the Committee were aware that the application will help local communities and local business with employment as an increase in the number of poultry will mean an extra stockman and help local people with work building the poultry houses, there will be a need for electricians and other professions, 4 or 5 other people will also be employed for the clean out period.
Mr Baxter referring to Item 3 on the Plans List (Menchine Farm) asked if the Committee were aware that in addition to the 5 further poultry units, the applicant had also applied for a pellet factory, which will have further traffic implications. An appeal would take place on 26 January and the inspector would consider traffic movement. High traffic will lead to harm to resident living conditions
Mr Lenton referring to Item 1 on the Plans List (Red Linhay) asked a question in 2 parts.
1 - the application before this committee is for an increased throughput of feedstocks and waste consumption– an increase of about 500 tonnes a year over the approved application. The officers own report makes clear that the size of the site has increased by 0.3 hectare, size of silage clamps increased volume by 17%, and digester tank by approx 15% from approved application. Given that the report makes clear that the principle of an AD can no longer be challenged, my question is how can it be that these increases do not result in anymore traffic movements and secondly given that these are additional and, in the view of the objectors, detrimental issues why is it that the officers report makes no attempt to address these issues other than to say that they are outweighed by the benefits and 2 – on the 4 December ... view the full minutes text for item 99. |
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING PDF 352 KB To receive the minutes of the previous meeting (attached).
Minutes: Subject to an amendment to Minute 89, Note b) removing the wording “many of the local residents” and replacing with “both objectors and the applicant”, the minutes of the meeting held on 16 December 2015 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS To receive any announcements the Chairman may wish to make.
Minutes: The Chairman informed the meeting that Principal Planning Officer Luke Smith would be leaving the authority and she wished him well. |
|
ENFORCEMENT LIST (00-41-00) PDF 93 KB To consider the items contained in the Enforcement List.
Additional documents: Minutes: Consideration was given to a case in the Enforcement List *.
Note: *List previously circulated; copy attached to signed Minutes.
Arising thereon:
a) No. 1 in the Enforcement List (Enforcement Case ENF/15/00122/UNLD – Building frontage incorporating charity shop allowed to deteriorate causing adverse effect on the visual amenity of the area)- The Society for the Protection and Re-Homing of Animals, 24 Gold Street, Tiverton
The Enforcement Officer outlined the contents of the report stating that the building in question was in the Tiverton Conservation Area. The property was in poor condition and required attention. The owner had now stated that he would address the situation. Enforcement action was still appropriate until such time as the works were complete.
RESOLVED that delegated authority be given to the Legal Services Manager to take any appropriate legal action including the service of a notice or notices seeking the improvement of the appearance of the property frontage. In addition, in the event of the failure to comply with any notice served, to authorise prosecution, direct action and/or authority to seek a court injunction.
(Proposed Cllr R L Stanley and seconded by Cllr Mrs H Bainbridge).
|
|
DEFERRALS FROM THE PLANS LIST To report any items appearing in the Plans List which have been deferred.
Minutes: There were no deferrals from the Plans List. |
|
THE PLANS LIST (00-44-00) PDF 926 KB To consider the planning applications contained in the list.
Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee considered the applications in the plans list *.
Note: *List previously circulated; copy attached to the signed Minutes.
(a) No 1 on the Plans List (15/01034/MFUL - Erection of a 500kW anaerobic digester and associated works with 2 silage clamps. Revised scheme to include the change of orientation of the layout and installation of 2 driers – land at NGR 299621 112764 (Red Linhay) Crown Hill, Halberton).
The Principal Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report explaining that the principle of the scheme had been approved by the Planning Committee, the amendments to the scheme were before Members today. Land feedstock sources had previously been identified and there was a condition restricting changes to these. Members viewed the proposed elevations of the amended plans, the position of the silage clamps, the extension to the planting scheme and photographs from various aspects of the site including a plan which identified the differences in the schemes and clarified that all the waste would be stored in sealed tanks.
He addressed the issues raised in public question time:
Noise and odour issues would be addressed through the Environment Agency permit
Rainwater would be channelled into the soakaway and effluent would go to the buffer tank.
The impact on the canal - people did use the area as a recreational site, there were glimpses from the canal, the dome could be seen in context with other buildings, and there were no protected species or flora identified in the assessment.
With regard to the habitat survey, dormice had been considered, traps had been laid but none had been found, no further surveys had taken place.
With regard to a possible challenge, the recommendation had been made purely in terms of policy.
Mr Lenton spoke of increases in size for various parts of the site, in fact many of the issues he raised had been reduced and there would be no increase in traffic generation. With regard to storage facilities, these would be sealed containers and the digestate would be spread on the land.
With regard to setting a precedent, the Head of Planning and Regeneration stated that undertaking works not in accordance with approved plans was not acceptable or to be condoned, however planning guidance stated that it was possible to seek to regularise unauthorised works in this way and that the application must be considered in the normal way.
With regard to the intentions of the applicant, a revised scheme had been submitted that had to be dealt with on its merits.
Consideration was given to:-
· Policy DM 22 – agricultural development · An archaeological survey · Whether there was room for an additional CHP unit – it was noted that this was not part of the application before Members. · Landscaping issues · Monitoring of conditions if approved · Whether the plant would work continuously · The transport assessment · The use of the gas flare · The environmental permit · Having been given so many assurances when the initial application was originally discussed, how could the original ... view the full minutes text for item 104. |
|
THE DELEGATED LIST (5-11-17) PDF 218 KB To be noted.
Minutes: The Committee NOTED the decisions contained in the Delegated List *.
Note: *List previously circulated; copy attached to signed Minutes.
|
|
MAJOR APPLICATIONS WITH NO DECISION (5-11-33) PDF 20 KB List attached for consideration of major applications and potential site visits.
Minutes:
The Committee had before it, and NOTED, a list * of major applications with no decision.
It was AGREED that:
Application 15/01822/MFUL - Alexandra Lodge, Tiverton be brought before the Committee for determination and that a site visit take place.
|
|
APPEAL DECISIONS (5-12-44) PDF 8 KB To receive for information a list of recent appeal decisions.
Minutes: The Committee had before it and NOTED a list of appeal decisions * providing information on the outcome of recent planning appeals.
Note: * List previously circulated; copy attached to signed Minutes.
|
|