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:
Due to connectivity issues the Chairman allowed the public to ask questions at various points during the meeting.
1. Lisa Clifford, a local resident, referring to Plans List 1 (19 Lower Millhayes, Hemyock) had asked that the Chairman to read out the following questions:
a. The planning officer conditions of use if planning is given are that the property cannot be rented for income or used as a separate unit - what contravenes this and how can this be policed?
b. I have referred to the Town and Country Schedule 2 - the policy which is sited in my objection - the building in question does contravene building regulations I question if these regulations are a request or requirement. I am confused why planning are considering it in its current footprint
c. Why are building regulations ignored to ensure the shed is not causing further issues with privacy and nuisance - for example safeguarding toilet ventilators are not facing neighbouring gardens.
2. Pat Jenkins, a local resident, again referring to Plans List 1 stated:
a. I submitted three photographs, the first and aerial photograph of no 19 taken 2002 clearly answers questions about the original shed, top left of the garden. Items top left and top right include two greenhouses both about 2.4 by 2.4 meters. By a third smaller greenhouse is a small wheelie bin used as a guide to show that the original shed is approximately 2.4 x 2.7 meters, 6.5 square meters. Erected in 1997/1998 it was a homemade shed with plywood boards and an overhanging galvanised roof. In July 2017 the property changed hands. In 2016 this shed, now over 20 years old and in a sad state of repair was demolished and removed from site so it was impossible to remodel it in 2017.
b. How would the committee members feel if their boundary fences were only 1 metre high? Photo 2 shows the boundary fence the black line shows the pond electrics. No 19’s decking extends down the garden to just past this point and butts up against the fence. Having measured the height of the decking myself it is 52cms not 45cms high. The red line marks the decking level in relation to the boundary fence 120cms solid panel with 30cms trellis top. 70cms of fence provides no privacy whatsoever when the decking is in use. The fact the people can look over the 152cms fence and into our gardens is an evasion of our right to privacy.
c. Why does the planning officer state that this outbuilding does not look out of place compared with other sheds in the gardens of other properties in the immediate area? My third photo shows the immediate area. The shed made from timber merges with the fences and becomes unobtrusive whereas the dark brown outbuilding is clearly out of keeping with the immediate area. Do planning officers carry any measuring devices to check plan measurements with measurement on the ground? If not why not? The plan inaccuracies would have been clearly evident if the measurements had been taken during the site visit
d. Finally, in accordance with the MDDC local enforcement plan of 2018, a site visit took place. At no point was I, or the owners of No 18, informed that this was due to take place. Why has no follow up site visit been done in accordance to policies DM1 and DM11 to check the decking and shed from our properties and get a balanced view from all perspectives? If a visit had been carried out it would have been evident of how imposing the combined structure is.
3. Martyn Baker, a local resident, speaking with regard to Plans List 5 (Duvale Priory, Bampton):
a. Is the committee aware that the planning inspectorate at the 2014 appeal made specific conditions that the venue was not to be used by non-residents?
b. Can the committee confirm why there is a need for the former livestock shed to be used for the public for live music events when there are several purpose built halls nearby. 2 at Bampton, Stoodleigh, Morbath, Shillingford, , Oakford, Cove and Huntsham
c. Can the committee confirm how it will police and enforce that the windows and doors are closed in the height of the summer and the numbers of public guests
d. Is the committee aware that the site is located next to the lake and river? Water is a conductor of sound it travels 5 times faster through water than air.
e. Can the committee confirm if the building has been inspected by an independent surveyor and is deemed fit for use as a music hall
f. Is the committee aware that the property is situated in the Exe Valley which amplifies the noise
g. Is the committee aware that there are 6 properties whose residents are yet to experience the previous noise and disruption
The Chairman advised that the questions would be addressed at the appropriate application