Agenda item

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.

Councillor David Parker objecting to application 25/00356/FULL -  Crediton Hamlets Parish Council spoke on behalf of Crediton Hamlets Parish Council as he was unable to address the Committee when the application was being considered under the “Plans List”

Marthe Gomer referred to Application No 25/00356/FULL.

The applicant, and their agent, ecologist, drainage experts, land surveyor, the St Francis Trust, the Parish Council and finally the people who live at Posbury all agree that the application site is a green field site, sometimes referred to by the applicant's team as: "a grass land field".  This is the one thing we all agree on.

There are only four exceptions to building a house on a green field site. These are:

1* Re use of a heritage site.

2* Re use of a redundant farm building.

3* Construction of an agriculturally tied dwelling.

4* The design of the dwelling is so exceptional and unique as to be given consideration.

The application fails on all four counts.

Question 1: Why has this come before the Committee when it clearly should have been stopped in its tracks by the Planning Officer months ago?"

I appreciate there is always a presumption of approval for applications but this is not bending the rules to allow a house to be built in the middle of a field - it's disregarding them entirely.  This field was used as a landfill site for two years by the applicant to dispose of builder's rubble including toxic and hazardous waste, in particular large quantities of asbestos are buried in huge pits all over the site.

Question 2: Should the Committee approve the application can there be a condition attached regarding the safe disposal of this material, not just for the resident’s safety but also the general public using the popular footpath which runs along two sides of the field?

Beverley Seal referred to Application No. 25/00356/FULL

My husband and I bought and converted the Old Chapel. We live immediately next to Nazareth and support its demolition.

Question 1: The Parish Council claim that if the application is allowed, a precedent for demolishing houses and building elsewhere on greenfield sites, would be created. Can the officers advise whether this is actually the case? Is it not the case that every planning application is treated on its own merits?

Question 2: Can the officers confirm that the Replacement Dwellings Policy DM10 of the local plan already allows the rebuilding of houses elsewhere on plots and hence the claim that allowing a relocation here is unusual or unprecedented in policy terms, is incorrect?

Chris Howard referred to Application Number 254/00752/FULL

I am objecting to 25/00752/FULL. I would really like the opportunity to object to the discharge of a condition of 19/00914/FULL that approved a plan to run sewage pipes across our gardens and along two elevations of our and our neighbour’s houses. However, this opportunity was not forthcoming, which I believe is a staggeringly unreasonable omission in planning process. However, as the two developments are working collaboratively, I wonder if the financial viability of one development is dependent on the other.

Question 1: Do Members feel that the values and priorities of Mid Devon District Council’s Corporate Plan are being upheld within this planning process? For example:  ‘Involving and engaging with our communities, ensuring everyone is treated with equity…’

‘The organisation…is run for the benefit of the people of Mid Devon.’

Section 2.6 on page 9 of the officer’s report states that ‘…the tank will be managed by a management company funded by the occupiers of the development.’

Question 2: Should these plans go ahead, do Members agree that third parties who will have land requisitioned to lay pipes from this tank, should be actively informed of the nature of this management company, and have access to the maintenance schedules when requested?

Question 3: Condition 8 states that the development must be strictly in accordance with the requirements of the ecological survey dated 8th July 2022. However, Section 1.3 of this report states clearly that the results of the ecological survey only remain valid for 12 months.

Do members agree that a renewed ecological survey is needed if the ‘strict accordance’ of condition 8 is to be met?

Stephanie Howard referred to Application Number 24/00752/FULL

I have read the documents on the portal with technical explanations for why conditions may have been met.  Two key issues remain

Question 1: I would like to ask Members if they feel the following consequences of this development are fair, in order for developers to build houses via a cheaper option than a possible alternative? 

Question 2: One is the destruction of local nature   - the laying of pipes through the properties of our neighbour and ourselves will involve crossing three hedges including one which is a traditional Devon bank.  It will also involve the destruction of established plants and shrubs, and reducing habitats for the wildlife within including bats and butterflies that I have observed only yesterday.  Do the Council believe this is justified? 

The detrimental effect on local amenities and the mental health of local residents remains the same.  In order for the developer to use a cheaper option of digging drains through our land, it will mean that an easement the length of approximately 60 meters long and three metres wide would need to be dug through the drives belonging to us and our neighbour.  This is causing extreme anxiety to us and our 82 year old neighbour Mrs Disney.  She is unable to be here today but has raised her objections via the planning portal.  There will be the stress and disruption while pipes are being laid and concern re how our properties will be affected and support these long term.  Our properties will be changed forever.

Question 3: Do Members believe that the current drainage plan for these houses justifies the stress and anxiety this will cause other residents?

Chris and I have spent hours trying to work with authorities and trying to understand how two small developments at the back of our house may be allowed to lead to the destruction of parts of our home.  South West Water have told us this is a planning issue, but Mid Devon District Council have told us that it is an issue to be taken up with South West Water.  Although one development has been given permission through conditions not needing public consultation, it has been stated in reports that the two developers are working together on issues such a drainage.  What we do now know is that by Mid Devon District Council passing this plan it allows developers to approach South West Water to requisition land to allow these works to take place.

Question 4:  I would like to ask Councillors if this is fair to local residents and a gain for local democracy?