Use the below search options at the bottom of the page to find information regarding recent decisions that have been taken by the council’s decision making bodies.
Alternatively you can visit the officer decisions page for information on officer delegated decisions that have been taken by council officers.
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 24/04/2019 - Council
Decision published: 30/04/2019
Effective from: 24/04/2019
Decision:
The Leader presented the report of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 4 April 2019
1. Operations Directorate Enforcement Policy (Minute 182)
The Leader MOVED seconded by Councillor C R Slade:
THAT the recommendations of the Cabinet as set out in Minute 182 be ADOPTED.
Upon a vote being taking, the MOTION was declared to have been CARRIED.
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 24/04/2019 - Council
Decision published: 30/04/2019
Effective from: 24/04/2019
Decision:
(1) Motion 553 (Councillor R B Evans – 13 February 2019)
The following Motion had been referred to the Planning Committee for consideration and report:
Background
Members are aware that a number of planning applications need to go
to Planning Committee for consideration; these applications have an
array of detail and associated information for members to consider
along with an officer recommendation and report.
Within this suite of reports there is often a detail on affordable
housing and the section 106 agreement outlining jointly agreed
contributions that will be applied to the build should the
application be successful, these agreements are evidently part of
the detail members are asked to consider and naturally will assist
members in making their informed decision .
It has become apparent that after approval has been received, it is
not uncommon for developers/ applicants to seek to alter such
agreements retrospectively via negotiations with officers, common
reasons sited are funding/ budget
related.
This motion is sought to be applied to any planning application
that has been considered by the planning committee and evidently
agreed where a retrospective application to alter the affordable
housing or the section 106 agreement is then received.
Proposed motion
Any planning application that is approved by Committee giving
specific affordable housing provision and or a detailed section 106
agreement as part of the information for members to consider that
subsequently receives any application to alter all or part of
these agreements must be referred to the relevant ward member/s for
their consideration and input.
Should both the officer dealing and the ward member/s agree to the
changes these can be allowed to form the new affordable housing
agreement and or section 106 agreements.
Should the ward member/s and officer dealing fail to agree on the
proposed changes or cannot negotiate agreeable alternatives then
the application to change the affordable housing and or section 106
agreement should be referred back to the committee for their
consideration and agreement / disagreement .
The Planning Committee at its meeting on 3 April considered the Motion and recommended that it be supported.
Councillor Evans, in accordance with Procedure Rule 16.5 requested that his motion be amended to include the wording “and the Cabinet Member for Housing” after …”relevant Ward Members” in the last line of the first paragraph.
Following discussion and upon a vote being taken, the MOTION was declared to have been CARRIED.
(2) Motion 554 (Councillor R J Chesterton – 20 March 2019)
The Council had before it a MOTION submitted for the first time:
In light of recent press articles on the subject, this Council believes that
(i) Parish and town councils should, in reply to any street naming proposal from a developer, be allowed to recommend to this Council that a street be named after an individual, including the living.
The MOTION was MOVED by Councillor R J Chesterton and seconded by Councillor C R Slade.
In accordance with Procedure Rule 14.4, the Chairman of the Council ruled that this MOTION STAND REFERRED to the Community Policy Development Group for consideration.
(3) Motion 555 (Councillor F W Letch – 8 April 2019)
The Council had before it a MOTION submitted for the first time:
Mel Stride MP recently said: “Central Devon has market towns with a wonderful variety of high street shops selling high-quality local produce and offering a range of services. Many are doing very well, but others face stiff competition from out of town and online retailers. I know that the margin between success and failure can be very small and even a small increase in the number of people who make it a priority to shop locally more often can make a big difference.”
High Street Saturday was on 16th of March. I propose that:- In order to encourage the high street shops in Mid Devon's 3 main towns, this council will not charge for Saturday parking in the long stay car-parks of Tiverton, Cullompton and Crediton.
The MOTION was MOVED by Councillor F W Letch and seconded by Councillor R Wright.
In accordance with Procedure Rule 14.4, the Chairman of the Council ruled that this MOTION STAND REFERRED to the Economy Policy Development Group for consideration.
(4) Motion 556 (Councillor N A Way – 8 April 2019)
Mid Devon District Council has a record of environmental protection and protecting wildlife.
Council is greatly concerned by the growing trend across the country of developers using netting over hedgerows and trees at development sites to stop birds nesting and other wildlife using the hedges and trees.
This is wrong and runs against the best interests of supporting and enhancing local wildlife.
We call on all developers not to use netting in Mid Devon. Additionally, we call on Government to ban the use of netting at all sites with planning consent, those sites identified in the Local Plan and the emerging Greater Exeter Strategic Plan.
The MOTION was MOVED by Councillor N A Way and seconded by Councillor J M Downes.
In accordance with Procedure Rule 14.4, the Chairman of the Council ruled that this MOTION STAND REFERRED to the Environment Policy Development Group for consideration.
To consider some grant support for the set up
of a South West Mutual Bank
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 24/04/2019 - Council
Decision published: 30/04/2019
Effective from: 24/04/2019
Decision:
The Leader presented the report of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 7 March 2019
1. Supporting the formation of a South West Mutual Bank (Minute 167)
The Leader MOVED seconded by Councillor R J Chesterton:
THAT the recommendations of the Cabinet as set out in Minute 167 be ADOPTED.
Upon a vote being taking, the MOTION was declared to have been CARRIED.
Lead officer: Andrew Jarrett
Decision Maker: Council
Made at meeting: 24/04/2019 - Council
Decision published: 30/04/2019
Effective from: 24/04/2019
Decision:
The Council had before it a *report of the Group Manager for Legal Services and Monitoring Officer recommending appointments to the Independent Remuneration Panel for Members Allowances in Mid Devon.
The Chairman MOVED that:
(1) Mr Paul Baker, Mrs Karen Stone and Mrs Marianne Hulland be appointed to the Independent Remuneration Panel until the Annual General Meeting in May 2023
(2) The members of the Independent Remuneration Panel be paid travelling expenses for attendance at meetings of the Panel at the same rates as those paid to councillors and officers from time to time
Upon a vote being taken, the MOTION was declared to have been CARRIED.
Note: *Report previously circulated.
Decision Maker: Planning Committee
Made at meeting: 23/04/2019 - Planning Committee
Decision published: 26/04/2019
Effective from: 23/04/2019
Decision:
The Committee had before it a *report of the Head of Planning, Economy and Regeneration regarding the above application.
The Area Planning Officer outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation highlighting the location of the bund of trees to the southern side of Scotts Quarry. The Tree Officer had visited the site and thought it sensible for a Tree Preservation be put in place. It was felt that the bund of trees would also help to screen the site. She provided photographs from various aspects of the site.
Consideration was given to:
· The location of the bund of trees was stabilising the bank behind the houses
· The views of the objector with regard to the loss of some of the trees alongside the river, the land had been badly managed and some of the trees would come down due to lack of husbandry.
RESOLVED that the Tree Preservation Order be confirmed as recommended by the Head of Planning, Economy and Regeneration.
(Proposed by Cllr B A Moore and seconded by Cllr R L Stanley)
Notes:
i) Mr Agoston-Vas spoke in objection to the application;
ii) *Report previously circulated, copy attached to minutes.
Decision Maker: Planning Committee
Made at meeting: 23/04/2019 - Planning Committee
Decision published: 26/04/2019
Effective from: 23/04/2019
Decision:
The Committee had before it and NOTED a *report of the Head of Planning, Economy and Regeneration regarding information on the outcome of planning appeals for the financial year 2018/19.
Note: *Report previously circulated, copy attached to minutes.
Decision Maker: Planning Committee
Made at meeting: 23/04/2019 - Planning Committee
Decision published: 26/04/2019
Effective from: 23/04/2019
Decision:
RESOLVED that the following application be determined or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the various recommendations contained in the list namely:
(i) No 2 on the Plans List (18/01691/FULL – Erection of a dwelling with associated access – 3-4 East End, Poughill) be refused as recommended by the Head of Planning, Economy and Regeneration.
(Proposed by the Chairman)
Note: Cllr R L Stanley declared a personal interest as the Cabinet Member for Housing and chose to leave the meeting during the vote.
(ii) No 3 on the Plans List (19/00337/FULL – Installation of a dormer window on front elevation to provide first floor accommodation and formation of a raised decking area to rear – 5 Broomhill, Tiverton) be approved subject to conditions as recommended by the Head of Planning, Economy and Regeneration.
(Proposed by the Chairman)
Note: The following late information was reported: response from the Highway Authority – no comments.
(b) No 1 on the Plans List (18/02000/FULL – Erection of extensions to existing farm shop – Exe Valley Farm Shop, Thorverton, Exeter).
The Area Team Leader outlined the contents of the report by way of presentation highlighting the application before members, the location of the site, the existing and proposed extensions, and existing and proposed elevations, the proposals for the ground floor and first floor and the meterage of the proposed café, office and first floor storage area along with the number of parking spaces proposed. The meeting then viewed photographs from various aspects of the site.
Consideration was given to:
· The size of the proposed extension to the shop and comparisons with regard to the extension to Crediton Garden Centre. The proposal would provide for a larger unrestricted retail area than the garden centre in Crediton.
· Whether trading hours would be restricted
· The height of the proposed extension
· The views of the applicant with regard to the history of the shop which was already certified for retail use, it was a local shop which was open 7 days a week and had 120 customers per day. The shop sold local produce and it was hoped with the café it would create a community hub and a destination for those people to enjoy the Exe Valley. There was mention of a 500 signature petition in support of the proposal.
· The views of the adjacent Ward Member who informed the meeting that there had been no objections to the application, the shop would be situated between Silverton and Thorverton which had 4000 inhabitants, he felt that the planning policy was ambiguous and the report negative, the scale of the proposal was large but not out of keeping with the area and he highlighted the size of the local garage, pub and local farm buildings. He felt that the applicant had a vision for local people and would create employment in the area.
· The total retail space
· The need to improve the rural economy and if there were concerns with regard to unrestricted retail use, it could be conditioned.
· The lack of an impact assessment
It was therefore:
RESOLVED that:
a) planning permission be granted for the following reasons, the scale was acceptable; the proposal was reasonable and in keeping with the local amenity, the proposal would help the local economy and create job opportunities and was also in line with Policy DM19 of the NPPF.
b) Delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning and Economy and Regeneration to provide a set of conditions to cover the following issues: Mark out parking spaces; programme of archaeological work; retail space limited to the existing plus the additional 144 square metres proposed, other spaces limited to uses set out in the application and committee report, opening hours to be realistic and other conditions required to control the development.
(Proposed by Cllr R L Stanley and seconded by Cllr F W Letch)
Notes:
i) Mrs May (Applicant) spoke;
ii) Cllr R M Deed spoke as Ward Member.
Decision Maker: Planning Committee
Made at meeting: 23/04/2019 - Planning Committee
Decision published: 26/04/2019
Effective from: 23/04/2019
Decision:
Consideration was given to the cases in the Enforcement List *.
Note: * List previously circulated; copy attached to the signed Minutes.
Arising thereon:
a) No. 1 in the Enforcement List (Enforcement Case ENF/19/00053/COU – Change of use of land and buildings to a use for human habitation and to the other to facilitate the storage of materials required or intended for use in the building works – agricultural buildings on Ratsash lane, Uffculme)
The Enforcement Officer outlined the contents of the report highlighting by way of presentation the 2 parcels of land in question and the location and history of the site. He provided the meeting with pictures of the buildings in 2014 and identified them as agricultural buildings; the photographs taken in 2017 identified that one of the buildings had been converted into a dwelling and the other as being used for storage for building materials. Photographs taken in April 2019 showed habitation of the agricultural building and work was continuing on the structure and that the storage building was being used for building equipment. He had visited the site prior to committee and noted that there had been some attempt to take down the roof. He explained that there had been 19 items of correspondence with the landowner over a number of years.
Consideration was given to:
· The views of the landowner who felt that he was immune from enforcement action as he had been receiving correspondence for 4 years with regard to the use of the land and that no action had been taken against him to date; he needed the buildings for family time and that he had been using it for that purpose for 4 years.
· The history of actions on the site, the advice given by 6 separate planning officers in relation to the use of the land and that any habitation of the building was against planning policy.
RESOLVED that delegated authority be given to the Group Manager for Legal Services and Monitoring Officer to take all such steps and action necessary to secure the cessation of the unauthorised use, including the issue of an enforcement notice and prosecution and/or Direct Action in the event of non-compliance with the notice.
(Proposed by the Chairman)
Note: Mr May spoke as landowner.
.