Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies were received from Cllr F W Letch who was substituted by Cllr J M Downes.

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.

Sarah Coffin, a local resident, referring to No 4 on the Plans list stated:

Red Linhay operated a 5000kw farm fed AD and a herd of 25 beef Charolais cattle with no declared intent for increased cattle numbers and no legitimate planning approval to increase AD energy production from this 100 acre farm. Therefore environmental benefit and necessity remain the key planning considerations.

Prior to this application both entities have been serviced by one permanent concrete silage clamp operating under EA permit within the AD site, as well as larger temporary soil based field silage help on the farm. Whilst environmental benefit appears self-evident from the application it would only be effective if it replaces the present temporary soil based silage clamp. Will Councillors condition any approval of this application accordingly?

Are Councillors aware of the ongoing investigations into numerous complaints and planning breaches concerning excess production with on farm Anaerobic Digesters across the region? I there ask Councillors to show due diligence and ensure any approval of this application will not facilitate further production excess.

Applicant claims Red Linhay is the hub site for outsourced feed stocks but these are limited and specified under the initial AD planning conditions. Any intentions to exceed present permitted outsourced feed stocks will require a Transfer Operators Licence – Does Red Linhay have such a licence?

There are serious local concerns that this application is merely a precursor to yet more back door expansion at this sensitive location. I quote the following adverts seen this year:

1.    An advert on Freeads.com under same name as the Red Linhay Manager offering sales of bulk grass pellet deliveries

2.    And another in January 2022 for new farm staff quoting ‘The company specialises in the growing and harvesting of a range of crops, not only for the on site AD unit but also our livestock feed pelleting enterprise

Paul Elstone, a local resident, also referring to No 4 on the plans list stated:

1.    When making the recommendation for approval did the planning offier fully take into consideration that the silage clamp will contain enough silage to feed the registered Red Linhay heard of 17 Charolais cows and 23 claves born since 2020 for around 45 years assuming a 6 month indoor and outdoor feeding cycle?

2.    If so how can this gross silage volume be fully justified other than it is being used for a different commercial purpose not related directly to this farm?

3.    When stating that the silage clamp will cause no additional impact to the local road network did the planning officer fully take into consideration that the silage clamp will hold around 500 loads of grass silage delivered by tractor to fill?

4.    When stating there will be no additional impacts on the local road network did the planning officer fully take into consideration that grass silage is being transported to Red Linhay to fill the clmap from as far as 23 miles away i.e. Clannaborough Barton at Bow or  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

To record any interests on agenda matters

Members were reminded of the need to make declarations where appropriate.

To consider whether to approve the minutes as a correct record of the meetings held on 24^th August 2022 and 7^th September 2022.

The minutes of the meetings held on 24th August 2022 and 7th September 2022 were agreed as a true record and duly SIGNED by the Chairman.

         To receive any announcements the Chairman may wish to make. 

The Chairman reminded Members of the informal planning committee meeting on 9^th November at 11.00am.

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.

Note: *List previously circulated and attached to the minutes

Applications dealt with without debate.

In accordance with its agreed procedure the Committee identified those applications contained in the Plans List which could be dealt with without debate.

RESOLVED that the following applications be determined or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the various recommendations contained in the list namely:

a)    Application 22/01753/NMA - Non-material amendment for 21/01957/FULL to allow reduction of building width by 1.5m, increase the stair core height by 0.6m and addition of a fixed clear glazing panel above the East elevation windows at Garages and Forecourt, Shapland Place, Tiverton. Planning permission be granted as recommended by the Development Management Manager

.

(Proposed by the Chairman)

Reason for the decision: As set out in the report

b)   Application 22/01668/TPO - Application to reduce limbs on south and southeast aspect of one Oak tree protected by Tree Preservation Order 94/00008/TPO by 3-5m, thin sub-lateral branches by 20%, reduce extended limb resting on floor to 4-5m from stem (truncating the limb) and truncate southwest limb at c.2.5m in height to c.3m from stem; crown reduce top height and northern aspect by c.1.5m and reduce the remainder of the south, southeast and west aspect by c.3-4m along with crown thinning of sub lateral branches c.10% at Land at NGR 295892 103149, Wyndham Road, Silverton. Consent granted

.

(Proposed by the Chairman)

Reason for the decision: As set out in the report

c)    Application 22/00398/MFUL - Erection of swimming pool building, conversion of squash courts into a P.E. department, external services compound and associated landscaping at Land at NGR 297202 113154 (Blundells School), Blundells Road, Tiverton.

The Area Team Leader outlined the application by way of a presentation highlighting aerial images, pool elevations, floor plans, roof plans, planting plan and photographs of the site.

The officer explained that the application was to improve facilities and increase sustainability and that the application had given consideration to the conservation area.

Consideration was given to:

·         The Squash Club would lose the facilities that they had rented for over 60 years

·         The pool would not be open to the general public and would not impact the local leisure centres

·         The views of the objector who stated that they had carried out extensive renovations to the existing squash courts over the years and that they would like it conditioned that new courts were made available before the old were converted

·         The views of the agent who stated that the new facility would be for the benefit of the school and pupils and that the current squash courts were not being utilised by the school. The squash courts would be replaced at some time in the future but that in the meantime there were other squash facilities in the local area

It was therefore RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to conditions as recommended by the Development Management Manager

(Proposed by E J Berry and seconded  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.

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 that:

1.    Application 22/01688/MOUT – Higher Town Sampford Peverell to be determined by Committee but no site visit required

2.    22/01562/MOUT – Growen Farm, Cullompton - to be determined by Committee and a full Committee site visit take place

Note: *list previously circulated and 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 and attached to the minutes