To consider the planning applications contained in the list.
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 (15/01604/MFUL – Erection of 5 poultry units (5040 sq.m) and biomass boiler unit; formation of attenuation pond, access track, and hardstanding; landscaping; and associated infrastructure – Land at NGR 288027 116786 (Gibbett Moor Farm) Templeton).
The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation highlighting the site location plan, the details of the development, the access route to the site and the proposed passing place, the site layout, attenuation ponds, proposed elevations and dimensions of the office buildings. He explained the proposed route outlined in the Waste Management Strategy for the movement of the waste to Menchine Farm. Members viewed photographs from various aspects of the site.
Referring to the questions posed in public question time:
· With regard to the proposed passing place, the Highway officer had felt that it would help the management of the traffic along that section of the network
· Members were well aware of the appeal decision for Menchine Farm
· With regard to the provision of the passing bay, initially the Highway Authority were seeking a financial contribution, however the Highway Authority considered that a passing bay would suffice. We are now bound by the legislation and cannot take money unless there was a specific need and the passing bay had been proposed
· With regard to the Environmental Health comments, the Environmental Health Officer had been involved with discussions
· With regard to the condition of the roads in the area, there were outstanding issues with drainage problems, but these were pre-existing, therefore the LPA could not require the applicant to address the issues, however highway improvements were proposed within the application with the inclusion of a passing place
Consideration was given to:
· The minimum width of vehicles on the roads in question
· The cumulative effect of applications in the area feeding the AD plant at Menchine Farm and the incremental increase in traffic flows as a result of the chicken houses being erected in the area.
· The impact of the appeal decision at Menchine
· If the amount of birds were increased to 95,000 what would the impact be with regard to environmental health issues
· Concerns regarding the information being received from the applicant
· Concerns that the conditions put in place for the Tollgate application and why such conditions were not being requested for this application
· The impact of the application on the local road network and possible highway safety
· Visual impact on the landscape
RESOLVED that Members were minded to refuse the application and therefore wished to defer the decision to allow for a report to be received setting out the implications for the proposed reasons for refusal based on the following issues:
· Cumulative impact of the number of operations in the area particularly in respect of traffic generation.
· Insufficient, inconsistent and inaccurate information in order for the Local Planning Authority to adequately access the impact of the application.
· Access and traffic – the unacceptable impact of traffic generation and on highway safety.
· Landscape and visual impact.
(Proposed by Cllr R L Stanley and seconded by Cllr B A Moore)
Notes:
(i) Cllr R F Radford declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest as a chicken farmer and therefore left the meeting during the discussion thereon;
(ii) Cllrs Mrs F J Colthorpe, R L Stanley, B A Moore and S G Flaws all declared personal interests as they either knew the applicant and/or local residents;
(iii) Ms Lyus (Clarke Willmott – on behalf of the local residents) spoke in objection to the application;
(iv) Cllr Miss Coffin spoke on behalf of Templeton Parish Council;
(v) Cllrs B A Moore and R L Stanley spoke as Ward Members;
(vi) The following late information was reported:
Four additional objections have been since the report was completed. The further representation raise concern about the proposed passing bay within Nomansland. In response to comment these concerns, the following points are considered relevant for members to consider.
Objectors have commented that the proposed passing bay within Nomansland would encourage HGV’s to use the village as a cut through for HGV traffic. It is also commented that a passing bay in this location would negatively impact on neighbouring amenity and could create flooding issues. Copies of photographs have been circulated which show the C308 flooded and a lorry stuck within a side ditch.
It is not considered that the proposed layby is likely to cause any additional flooding issues, or encourage additional use of the lane by HGVs. It is clear from the representations and submitted photographs that the existing section highway is effectively a narrow part of the network and it is problematic for vehicles to pass safely without using the verge, and on a passing bay in this location is therefore considered to be a beneficial addition to the local road infrastructure. Due to the reasonably low speed of the road, the nature of a passing bay (vehicles will only pull into it temporarily), and the existing location of the road in relation to nearby neighbouring dwellings, it is not considered that the proposed passing bay would have a negative impact the amenity of neighbouring properties. Discussions with the Highways Authority confirm this passing bay is a necessary improvement to the highway, and approval of the proposed scheme with the recommended offsite highways works is advised.
Comments have also made regarding the recent appeal decision to refuse planning permission to increase the capacity of the Menchine AD. It is considered by local residents that the existing Menchine AD plant will not have the capacity to utilise the waste as feedstock for the AD plant if 90,000 chickens are grown each cycle. As members are aware the Menchine AD plant was granted planning permission on the basis that the feedstock would be for 6,545 tonnes of arable crop and 3,000 tonnes of poultry litter. The supporting information suggests that each of the new units at Menchine, Edgeworthy and Gibbet Moor will supply on average 820 tonnes of poultry litter, which in conjunction with the litter generated on the existing Menchine unit would be close to this proposed annual figure, however would not exceed the 3000 tonnes. Taking into account this information the existing AD plant at Menchine is deemed to be adequate for the disposal of chicken waste from this proposed unit, and the other applications recently submitted by the applicant and approved..
No additional issues have been raised that have not already been considered by the LPA and covered within the officer report.
Templeton Parish Council submitted an additional comment on the 04/04/2016. This is set below:
We write to confirm our original objections to this above application and to agree with other objectors comments, in that we have no confidence in the authenticity of the additional information supplied by the Applicant's Consultants.
Highways/Traffic -
No accumulative consideration given to other existing farms whose agricultural traffic is also serviced by the same rural sub-standard roads in both Mid Devon District and North Devon District areas.
No accumulative consideration given to traffic servicing other existing businesses in Mid Devon and North Devon for which the same sub-standard infrastructure often defines parish and district boundaries.
No account taken of the accumulative residential and service traffic that utilises the affected local infrastructure as the most direct access to Nomansland, Thelbridge, Puddington, Cruwys Morchard, Pennymoor and Witheridge from the 4361 and vice versa.
Environmental Protection against pollution of air, water and soil-
No effective planning control to prevent the number of chickens kept within the described units being increased from 60,000 to 95,000 per cycle. The applicant has neither assessed nor recognised any consequential increases in manure/waste/traffic/nuisance within the documents provided with this Application.
No comprehensive Waste & Manure Plan provided by applicant. Does the applicant have enough access to suitable safe storage/Iand to facilitate the waste/manure produced by this development? (This is particularly relevant and important as the applicant does not appear to have clear title to the site and associated lands which are in administration). According to this application the disposal of all manures/slurries to be spread as fertilizers, appear to be totally reliant on the availability of rented seasonal/short term agricultural business lets. The disposal of any waste is to go to Menchine Anaerobic Digester (which applicant does not own or operate).
Templeton as a Parish Council respectfully request the LPA to pay particular attention to the problems related to Manure/Slurry/Waste disposal as we and some of our neighbouring parishes, have been and still are experiencing numerous and considerable problems with inappropriate storage and over spreading of superfluous Manures and Wastes crossing Parish/District and County borders.
Failure to have unambiguous clarity on the responsible and safe disposal of all Industrial/Factory farmed waste/manures creates an unacceptable Bio-security risk for the general well-being of our entire Environment, to include all other livestock farmers.
We therefore repeat our request that the Planning Committee refuse this application.
In response to this consultation, the following comments are considered relevant.
· The highway impacts of the proposed scheme of development are considered with the officer report. An adequate assessment of the vehicle movements associated with this application is considered to have been made, including in relation to cumulative impacts. There will be 54 annual vehicle movements from Gibbett Moor Farm to Menchine AD annually to deliver chicken waste. This is not considered to create any significantly negative impacts on the residents of Nomansland.
· As noted above, the LPA are required to consider the application on its merits. Waste will be disposed of at Menchine Farm AD. The application will be controlled by an environmental permit, therefore if waste disposal arrangements change adequate procedures are in place to prevent any significant environmental impacts.
The LPA maintain a recommendation of approval.
Conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, 12 and 13 have been amended as follows:
CONDITIONS
3. No development shall be commenced until details of the surface water drainage system based on the surface water being piped to a swale and then discharged as shown on the approved development area plan, have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved drainage scheme shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved scheme before any part of the development is occupied, and be so retained.
Condition 3 has been amended to include the clause “in accordance with the approved scheme”
4. Prior to the commencement of the development the site accesses and visibility splays shall be constructed, laid out and maintained for that purpose in accordance with drawings which shall have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be completed and retained in accordance with the approved details.
Condition 4 has been amended to provide a pre-commencement timescale.
5. Prior to the commencement of the development the site access road shall be hardened, surfaced, drained and maintained thereafter, for a distance of not less than 6.00 metres back from its junction with the public highway
Condition 5 has been amended to include the clause “prior to commencement of the development”
6. In accordance with details that shall previously have been submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority, provision shall be made within the site for the disposal of surface water so that none drains on to any County Highway. The approved surface water drainage scheme shall be provided on site prior to the commencement of the development.
Condition 6 has been amended to include the clause “The approved surface water drainage scheme shall be provided on site prior to the commencement of the development.”
12. Prior to their installation, details of the underground water storage tanks shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The tanks shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and shall be so retained.
Condition 12 has been updated to include “The tanks shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and shall be so retained.”
13. No development shall begin until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, a landscaping scheme which includes details of all existing hedgerows, hedgerow removal, new planting, seeding, turfing or earth reprofiling. The details approved in the landscaping scheme shall be carried out within 9 months of the substantial completion of the development, and any trees or plants which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species. Once provided, the landscaping scheme shall be so retained.
The term “(or phase thereof)” has been deleted from condition 13.
(b) No 2 on the Plans List (15/01822/MFUL – Erection of 45 Extracare apartments and provision of associated communal facilities, car parking and landscaping, renovation of Alexandra Lodge following demolition of former stable block and extensions – Alexandra Lodge, 5 Old Road, Tiverton).
The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation highlighting the site location plan, the layout of the scheme, the listed buildings, gardens and trees, the distances between the proposed development and nearby residences in The Avenue, the proposed elevations identified from different aspects of the site, the works proposed to the listed building and photographs from various aspects of the site.
She addressed the questions posed in public question time:
· The Local Planning Authority were aware of the lack of care available for the elderly
· There was no alternative provision in Mid Devon
· The 2011 strategy did require review
· There were no allocated sites within the Mid Devon Local Plan
· Representations from various people had been received and reported
· Because of the setting of the listed building the application was considered to be unacceptable
Consideration was given to:
· The impact of the development on the listed building
· The need for elderly social and health care
· The detail of the scheme
· The lack of other sites in the area
· The size of the development and the impact on the neighbouring properties, specifically the residents of The Avenue
· The distance between the proposed development and the houses backing onto the site
· Access over the driveway to the Glades
· The need to do something with the building
· The proposed landscaping
RESOLVED that planning permission be granted for the following reason: that the public benefits outweighed the impact on the setting of the listed building and that delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to draft an appropriate set of conditions.
(Proposed by Cllr B A Moore and seconded by Cllr R L Stanley)
Notes:
(i) Cllr D J Knowles declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest with regard to the application as he was a resident of the Almshouse Trust and paid rent to the Trust, he therefore left the meeting during the discussion thereon;
(ii) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe declared a personal interest as she knew both supporters and objectors to the application;
(iii) Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as he knew both supporters and objectors to the application and that his wife was a director of the Almshouse Trust;
(iv) Cllr J M Downes declared a personal interest as his wife used to work at Alexandra Lodge;
(v) Cllrs Mrs H Bainbridge, K I Busch, Mrs C A Collis, Mrs F J Colthorpe, J M Downes, S G Flaws, P J Heal, F W Letch, B A Moore, R F Radford, J D Squire and R L Stanley made declarations in accordance with the Protocol of Good practice for Councillor dealing in planning matters as they had received correspondence regarding this application;
(vi) Mr Kearley spoke in support of the application;
(vii) Mr Morgan spoke on behalf of the objectors;
(viii) The Chairman read a letter from Cllr Mrs C P Daw (Ward Member);
(ix) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe requested that her abstention from voting be recorded.
(c) No 3 on the Plans List (15/01824/LBC – Listed Building Consent for the erection of 45 Extracare apartments and provision of associated communal facilities, car parking and landscaping, renovation of Alexandra Lodge following demolition of former stable block and extensions – Alexandra Lodge, 5 Old Road, Tiverton).
The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation highlighting the site location plan, the layout of the scheme: the listed buildings, gardens and trees, the distances between the proposed the development and nearby residences in The Avenue, the proposed elevations identified from different aspects of the site, the works proposed to the listed building and photographs from various aspects of the site.
She addressed the questions posed in public question time:
· The Local Planning Authority were aware of the lack of care available for the elderly
· There was no alternative provision in Mid Devon
· The 2011 strategy did require review
· There were no allocated sites within the Mid Devon Local Plan
· Representations from various people had been received and reported
· Because of the setting of the listed building the application was considered to be unacceptable
Consideration was given to:
· The impact of the development on the listed building
· The need for elderly social and health care
· The detail of the scheme
· The lack of other sites in the area
· The size of the development and the impact on the neighbouring properties, specifically the residents of The Avenue
· The distance between the proposed development and the houses backing onto the site
· Access over the driveway to the Glades
· The need to do something with the building
· The proposed landscaping
RESOLVED that listed building consent be granted for the following reason: that the public benefits outweighed the impact on the setting of the listed building and that delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning and Regeneration to draft an appropriate set of conditions.
(Proposed by Cllr J M Downes and seconded by Cllr P J Heal)
Notes:
(i) Cllr D J Knowles declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest with regard to the application as he was a resident of the Almshouse Trust and paid rent to the Trust, he therefore left the meeting during the discussion thereon;
(ii) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe declared a personal interest as she knew both supporters and objectors to the application;
(iii) Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as he knew both supporters and objectors to the application and that his wife was a director of the Almshouse Trust;
(iv) Cllr J M Downes declared a personal interest as his wife used to work at Alexandra Lodge;
(v) Cllrs Mrs H Bainbridge, K I Busch, Mrs C A Collis, Mrs F J Colthorpe, J M Downes, S G Flaws, P J Heal, F W Letch, B A Moore, R F Radford, J D Squire and R L Stanley made declarations in accordance with the Protocol of Good practice for Councillors dealing in planning matters as they had received correspondence regarding this application;
(vi) Mr Tabiner spoke in support of the application;
(vii) Mr Morgan spoke on behalf of the objectors;
(viii) The Chairman read a letter from Cllr Mrs C P Daw (Ward Member);
(ix) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe requested that her abstention from voting be recorded.
(d) No 4 on the Plans List (15/02004/FULL – Conversion of redundant building to dwelling – Holes Cottage, Bary Close, Cheriton Fitzpaine).
The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation identifying the block plan of the proposal along with parking arrangements, floor plans and existing and proposed elevations. He explained an issue that had arisen with regard to the kitchen window and Members viewed photographs from various aspects of the site which considered overlooking issues.
Consideration was given to:
· The parking and privacy issues
· The ground floor window would be obscured
· Possible soundproofing of the kitchen window
· A request to block the window up.
RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to conditions as recommended by the Head of Planning and Regeneration with an amendment to Condition 3 to state that the kitchen window be soundproofed as well as being of obscured glazing and non-opening.
(Proposed by Cllr F W Letch and seconded by Cllr J M Downes)
Notes:
(i) Cllr Mrs F J Colthorpe declared a personal interest as the Ward Member who had called the application to Committee;
(ii) Mr Garside spoke as agent to the application;
(iii) Mrs Walls spoke in objection to the application;
(iv) The following late information was provided: The EH consultation response as set out in the report suggests that the windows in the bedroom do not provide adequate lighting and the staircase is unprotected which therefore does not provide a satisfactory means of escape in the event of a fire. The applicant’s agent revised the plans to address these issues in relation to the planning application proposals.
It should be noted that the comments set out raise some matters (internal arrangements)that would be addressed through the building regulations process should planning permission be granted.
(e) No 5 on the Plans List (16/00030/FULL – Conversion of garage to reception room, erection of first floor extension above the erection of detached garage – 6 Blenheim Court, Willand).
The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation highlighting the block plan and existing and proposed floor plans, photographs were shown from various aspects of the site which also identified other extensions in the immediate area.
She answered the questions posed in public question time:
· Planning permission had been previously granted for a detached garage
· Privacy would be addressed through fixed and non-openable, obscure glazed windows
· Regarding an additional condition requiring the connecting door to be retained, it was felt that because of the close connected relationship between the extension and the main house it was unlikely to be used individually, however Members may feel the need to add the condition.
Consideration was given to the design of the extension, parking issues in the area and the overall massing of the proposal.
RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to conditions as recommended by the Head of Planning and Regeneration, with two additional conditions stating:
” 5. The garage conversion and first floor extension hereby approved shall be occupied only for purposes ancillary to the occupation of the dwelling currently known as 6 Blenheim Court, Willand, EX15 2TE, and shall not be used, let, sold, or otherwise disposed of separately from the main dwelling.
Reason: To ensure that the garage conversion and first floor extension remains ancillary to the existing dwelling and is not sold or occupied separately from the main dwelling. The application has been considered as an extension only and there are inadequate parking and amenity facilities for an additional dwelling on the site.”
6. The internal ground floor door between the proposed converted garage and the main dwelling currently known as 6 Blenheim Court, Willand, EX15 2TE, as shown on the proposed floor plans drawing number 003, dated and received by the Local Planning Authority on 22.01.16, shall at all times be retained as a door capable of opening.
Reason: To ensure that the garage conversion and first floor extension is not separated from the main dwelling, and remains accessible from the main dwelling at all times. The application has been considered as an extension only and there are inadequate parking and amenity facilities for an additional dwelling on the site.”
(Proposed by Cllr R L Stanley and seconded by Cllr J M Downes)
Notes:
(i) Cllr Warren (Willand Parish Council) spoke in objection to the application;
(ii) Cllr R J Chesterton spoke as Ward Member.
Supporting documents: