Venue: Phoenix Chamber, Phoenix House, Tiverton
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 D J Knowles, who was substituted by Cllr Mrs J Roach. |
|
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 Herniman referring to Item 11 on the agenda (Howden Court) asked whether the Committee were aware that the siting of the footpath in a shady, narrow, unlit area to the rear of our house does not meet the nationwide police standards set out in their officially approved policy security initiative document called “Secured by Design”? In commenting on the design during a recent site visit, the local Crime Prevention Design Officer from Devon & Cornwall Police Constabulary said he could find no record of initial consultation with them on the original planning application - and if the application was before them now for comment the police force would have strong reservations.
Mrs Herniman referring to Item 11 on the agenda (Howden Court) asked whether the committee is aware that the design of the footpath being squeezed between our back door and the hedge line, is not fit for purpose? There are over forty steep steps up the bank to the new estate meaning anyone with limited mobility or carrying shopping will struggle to use it. On plan it is difficult to imagine the gradient but the photographs you have in front of you give an indication of what is involved. It is a well-known fact that pedestrians only use a footpath if it’s taking them where they want to go! The problem here is that it is difficult to see why the footpath was intended and who it is there to serve, given its topography and location and the fact that, according to the Developer, it can only be used by residents of Phase 2 of Aubyn’s Wood Rise.
Jonathan Ison again referring to Item 11 on the agenda (Howden Court) made the following statement stated that the requirement for a path had been in place ever since the land was allocated for development in the Local Plan about 10 years ago. This requirement is consistent with national planning policy which seeks to achieve integrated and inclusive communities. The requirement was carried through for the planning consent despite active efforts by the developer and the land owner to remove it. I attended the Council debates at the time and saw the extent to which the Planning Committee insisted that the path should be a condition of the granting of the planning permission. This was backed up by a binding legal agreement signed and witnessed in October 2012 whereby the land owner, the developer and the Council agreed that the path would be in place before the first house at St Aubyn’s Rise was occupied. When, in November 2014, the first house was being prepared for occupation, I asked the planning office why the path had not been built? I think it fair to say that despite repeating my question many times by email and by telephone, I have not had a proper answer. I’ve seen the concerns expressed by the occupants of the new houses regarding safety and security but I cannot see why this should defeat national planning policy. ... view the full minutes text for item 104. |
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (00-19-15) PDF 351 KB To receive the minutes of the previous meeting (attached).
Minutes: Subject to an amendment to Minute 97 (c), Note (vi) to read “The following late information was reported as an amendment to Condition 1 as outlined above”, the minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2016 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS (00-21-45) To receive any announcements the Chairman may wish to make.
Minutes: The Chairman had the following announcements to make:
· She informed the meeting that in the absence of the Head of Planning and Regeneration today, her role would be replaced by senior planning officers; · She welcomed Susanne Disney (Enforcement Officer) to her first meeting. |
|
ENFORCEMENT LIST (00-22-00) PDF 134 KB To consider the items contained in the Enforcement List.
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/16/00269/NUDRU– unauthorised carrying out of engineering operations and excavation works on agricultural land to create a slurry pit – Pulsards Farm, Pennymoor, Tiverton).
The Enforcement Officer outlined the contents of the report informing the meeting that an application had been submitted retrospectively to Devon County Council; she had been informed that this had not been validated to date as some of the information required was missing. There was a need to establish whether this application would be a county matter or whether it would sit with the District Council. However legal advice had been sought which had confirmed that enforcement action could proceed. She outlined the issues at Pulsards Farm where works had been undertaken without permission which had involved the excavation and works for a slurry pit within 400 metres of a protected building. A temporary stop notice had been served following consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee.
She addressed the issues raised in public question time: the landlord had received a copy of the Stop Notice and would receive any copies of further notices. She requested that Miss Coffin contact her separately with the detail of her other questions and she would provide a written response.
Consideration was given to:
· the continuity of the temporary stop notice and any other notice. · the work that had taken place as described by the agent and the link between the AD plant at Edgeworthy and the transport statement submitted as part of that application. · The extent of the works that had taken place without permission.
RESOLVED that the Legal Services Manager be given delegated authority to:
a) Issue a Stop Notice requiring the cessation of all works in connection with the creation of slurry pit or digestate storage facility at the site, and;
b) Issue an enforcement notice requiring the cessation of all works in connection with the creation of a slurry pit or digestate storage facility at the site and reinstate the land to the same contours and levels as the surrounding agricultural fields;
c) Take any legal action deemed appropriate including prosecution or Direct Action in the event of non-compliance with the notices.
(Proposed Cllr P J Heal and seconded by Cllr R L Stanley)
Notes:
(i) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe declared a personal interest as the landowner, tenants and others were known to her, she was also Ward Member;
(ii) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe and P J Heal made declarations in accordance with the Protocol of Good Practice for Councillors dealing with planning matters as they had been involved with the issuing of the Stop Notice;
(iii) Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as he knew some of the objectors and the person undertaking the work;
(iv) Cllrs R J Dolley and B A ... view the full minutes text for item 107. |
|
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 (00-41-01) PDF 555 KB To consider the planning applications contained in the list.
Minutes: RESOLVED that the following application be determined or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the various recommendations contained in the list namely:
(i) No 4 on the Plans List (16/01391/HOUSE Erection of extension to ground floor utility and erection of first floor extension above – 38 Higher Town, Sampford Peverell) be approved as recommended by the Head of Planning and Regeneration. (Proposed by the Chairman)
Notes:
(i) Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as he knew the applicant very well;
(ii) All Members present declared that they did know the applicant;
(iii) Cllr R L Stanley requested that his abstention from voting be recorded.
(ii) No 6 on the Plans List (16/01599/FULL Erection of extension and alterations to layout of existing car park, Exe Valley Leisure Centre, Bolham Road, Tiverton) be approved as recommended by the Head of Planning and Regeneration. (Proposed by the Chairman)
Note: Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as he had been involved in discussions regarding the proposal.
(b) No 1 on the Plans List (16//01117/FULL Change of use of agricultural land and buildings to form camping site, to include provision for 2 shepherds hut pitches, 2 safari tent pitches and 6 bell tent pitches; conversion of existing stables to shower/toilets, office meeting room, sensory room for visitors, washing facilities, and storage; erection of 2 new blocks to serve campsite; and formation of equestrian area for grazing of miniature horses – Ingleton Farm, Ashill). The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report highlighting by way of presentation the site location plan, aerial photographs of the site, the existing and proposed site layout, the proposed access, details of the proposed pitches and Members viewed photographs from various aspects of the site.
She provided answers to questions posed in public question time, with regard to the highway issues, she was not aware of any road improvements planned for the area, representations had been received from the Highway Authority who had no issues with the application. With regard to the hedge, there were no plans to move the hedge line however an amended Condition 9 referred to landscaping issues. With regard to the benefit of the application, she felt that the application would have a positive impact and would be of economic benefit to the local area.
Consideration was given:
· The land was outside the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty · Further licenses that would be required · The number of supporters to the application and where these supporters lived · Possible noise issues · Boundary screening and possible loss of daylight · Highway safety issues · Possible overdevelopment of the site · Recent planning history · Whether the business plan would stand up RESOLVED that ... view the full minutes text for item 109. |
|
THE DELEGATED LIST (2-08-14) PDF 275 KB To be noted.
Minutes: The Committee NOTED the decisions contained in the Delegated List *.
Note: *List previously circulated; copy attached to Minutes.
|
|
MAJOR APPLICATIONS WITH NO DECISION (2-09-00) PDF 28 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 16/01772/MOUT be brought before the committee for determination and that a site visit take place. · Application 16/01707/MOUT be brought before the committee for determination but that there was no need for a site visit to take place
Note: *List previously circulated; copy attached to the Minutes.
|
|
APPEAL DECISIONS (2-11-39) PDF 21 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.
|
|
To consider a report of the Head of Planning and Regeneration regarding this application. Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee had before it a * report of the Head of Planning and Regeneration regarding the above application. The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report explaining that the issues raised related to the scheme of development approved under reference: 11/01927/MFUL for erection of 36 dwellings with associated access road, car parking, landscaping and demolition of existing outbuildings adjacent to Howden Court. The matter for members consideration at the meeting related to the delivery of a link between the development area and Palmerston Park which was shown on the approved plans and referred to in the Section 106 agreement but had not yet been built out.
As background it was confirmed that planning permission had been granted for the scheme of development in June 2012, with the committee having first considered the application scheme at an earlier meeting in March 2012. The committee resolved to grant planning permission subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement to cover various matters and to a number of conditions to control/regulate the delivery of the approved scheme. Following the completion of the legal matters to agree the terms of the Section 106 agreement on the 24th October 2012 the planning permission decision notice certificate was issued on the 9th November 2012. He drew attention to the proposed link between the new estate and Palmerston Park which had formed part of the S106 agreement. Although the section of the link outside the application site had been completed, the formation of the pathway from the site boundary adjacent to Palmerston Park up to the estate road serving the new development had not been completed.
He identified by way of presentation the area for the proposed footpath, the change in ground level, the route down the hill to Howden Court and photographs from various aspects of the site. He highlighted the requirements Policy AL/TIV/10 and informed the meeting that all parties had signed the Section 106 Agreement. The report highlighted the fact that the new residents of the estate were largely not in favour of the footpath link being delivered as there were concerns that it would remain unadopted, with no lighting that could lead to safety and security issues, they also felt quite strongly that because of the change in levels that the path was not likely be used with residents stating that a route down to the Exeter Road and along the footway into Tiverton would be the preferable route if there were walking into town. The report also highlighted the safety and security concerns expressed by the occupiers of the property referred to as Howden Court.
He provided answers to question posed in public question time stating that all parties had agreed to the route and that the S106 agreement had been signed. There was now a different Police Architectural Liaison Officer in post, the concerns raised with regard to safety and security were valid however a safe and secure route could be delivered. Whilst the main ... view the full minutes text for item 113. |
|
Additional documents: |