Venue: The John Meikle Room - The Deane House. View directions
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apologies
To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Adkins, Aldridge, Martin Hill, Morgan, Nicholls and Tully |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minutes of the previous meeting of the Planning Committee PDF 265 KB
To approve the minutes of the previous meeting of the Planning Committee held on 30 May 2019. Minutes:
Resolved that the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 30 May 2019 with an amendment be confirmed as a correct record.
The Motion was carried. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest or Lobbying
To receive and note any declarations of disclosable pecuniary or prejudicial or personal interests or lobbying in respect of any matters included on the agenda for consideration at this meeting.
(The personal interests of Councillors and Clerks of Somerset County Council, Town or Parish Councils and other Local Authorities will automatically be recorded in the minutes.) Minutes: Members present at the meeting declared the following personal interests in their capacity as a Councillor or Clerk of a County, Town or Parish Council or any other Local Authority:-
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Participation
The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.
For those members of the public who have requested to speak, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker and you will be asked to speak before Councillors debate the issue. Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Question Time
Minutes: No questions were received for Public Question Time |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Erection of replacement pavilion, equipment store and multi-use games area, alteration’s to the access and provision of car parking area (as revised) at The Recreation Ground, Stoke St Gregory Decision: Application Approved as per Officer Recommendation. Minutes: Erection of replacement pavilion, equipment store and multi-use games area, alterations to the access and provision of car parking area (as revised) at The Recreation Ground, Stoke St Gregory
Comments by Member of the Public;
· Existing building was 113 years old and in poor repair; · The building was used on a regular basis by the School and Tennis Club; · Building widely used by the local School; · The new Pavilion would benefit the social fabric of the village; · Flood lighting would add an important dimension to the application;
The Member’s debate centred on the following issues;
· The application should be deferred to allow the recreation ground committee to reconsider the application regarding Flood Lights not being on this application; · Concerns regarding parking spaces; · Safety issues; · Concerns with the lack of communication between the Agent and Applicant regarding the flood lights; · Concerns with the removal of the hedgerow; · Super addition to the local community;
Councillor R Habgood proposed and Councillor M Lithgow seconded a motion that the application be APPROVED as per Officer Recommendation;
The Motion was carried |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Variation of Condition No. 06 (restriction of occupancy) of application 3/04/15/011 at Allshire, Allshire Lane, Brushford, EX16 9JG Decision: Application Refused as per Officer Recommendation Minutes: Variation of Condition No. 06 (restriction of occupancy) of application 3/04/15/011. Allshire, Allshire Lane, Brushford
Comments be members of the public
· No harm identified in this variation; · Development was within the curtilage of the original building; · Development meets local housing needs; · This was a rural location with no public services in the area so vehicle was needed; · The dwelling was not finished or in use yet; · This was a sustainable development; · There would be no loss of employment opportunities;
The Member’s debate centred on the following issues;
· The development had not been tried and tested as a Holiday Let; · Dwelling did not meet the National Planning Policy framework;
Councillor Marcia Hill proposed and Councillor G Wren seconded a motion that the application be REFUSED as per Officer Recommendation.
The Motion was carried
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
43/18/0065
Erection of 23 No. dwellings including 5 affordable units with vehicular access, public open space, landscaping and associated works on land off Taunton Road, Wellington as amended by revised Flood Risk Assessment and revised plans Decision: Application Deferred Minutes:
Erection of 23 No. dwellings including 5 affordable units with vehicular access, Public open space, landscaping and associated works on land off Taunton Road, Wellington as amended be revised Flood Risk Assessment and revised plans.
Comments made by member of the public;
· This development was fully supported by the Somerset West and Taunton Housing Enabling team;
The member’s debate centred on the following issues;
· Concerns that the S106 was not secured; · Not enough parking on the site for residents and visitors; · Traffic issues, the junction was not fit for this amount of housing; · Concerns that only 9 properties were compliant with Policy D10; · Concerns that this was a sub-standard development; · Land was difficult to develop and not in the Core Strategy; · Development was close to the green wedge; · Concerns that the existing trees would not be retained; · Concerns with the access and egress to the site; · Concerns with increased traffic; · Concerns with the cycle path route; · No need for this development in Wellington; · Concerns that this was not a sustainable development; · Concerns with the loss of farm land; · Flooding issues; · Wildlife issues; · Development did not address the climate change mitigation; · This farm land was not fit for animal grazing; · Concerns with the loss of Social housing; · If the development was not viable the developer should look elsewhere for a more suitable site; · Concerns that there was extant planning permission on this site;
Councillor S Coles proposed and Councillor R Habgood seconded a motion that the application be DEFERRED
Reasons
1. Further information required around the 18 unit’s permission and what was secured under that permission and to confirm that it is an extant permission;
2. Officers to go away and speak to the applicant to negotiate the issues raised by the Committee for the size of the units, the number of parking spaces the cycleway and the viability issues around numbers of affordable housing;
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Latest Appeals and Decisions received
Minutes: Noted that there were three Decisions and one Appeal received. |