Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Offices, Churchfield, Wincanton.

Contact: Kelly Wheeler, Case Services Officer (Support Services) - 01935 462038  Email: kelly.wheeler@southsomerset.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

74.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 14th March 2018.

Minutes:

The minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 14th March, copies of which had been circulated, were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

75.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies of absence received.

76.

Declarations of Interest

In accordance with the Council’s current Code of Conduct (as amended 26 February 2015), which includes all the provisions relating to Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI), personal and prejudicial interests, Members are asked to declare any DPI and also any personal interests (and whether or not such personal interests are also “prejudicial”) in relation to any matter on the Agenda for this meeting. 

Members are reminded that they need to declare the fact that they are also a member of a County, Town or Parish Council as a Personal Interest.  Where you are also a member of Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council within South Somerset you must declare a prejudicial interest in any business on the agenda where there is a financial benefit or gain or advantage to Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council which would be at the cost or to the financial disadvantage of South Somerset District Council. 

Planning Applications Referred to the Regulation Committee

The following members of this Committee are also members of the Council’s Regulation Committee:

Councillors Sarah Dyke, Tony Capozzoli, Nick Weeks and Colin Winder.

Where planning applications are referred by this Committee to the Regulation Committee for determination, Members of the Regulation Committee can participate and vote on these items at the Area Committee and at Regulation Committee.  In these cases the Council’s decision-making process is not complete until the application is determined by the Regulation Committee.  Members of the Regulation Committee retain an open mind and will not finalise their position until the Regulation Committee.  They will also consider the matter at Regulation Committee as Members of that Committee and not as representatives of the Area Committee.

Minutes:

Councillors William Wallace, Anna Groskop and Mike Lewis, members of SCC (Somerset County Council), would only declare an interest in any business on the agenda where there was a financial benefit or gain or advantage to SCC which would be at the cost or to the financial disadvantage to SSDC.

 

The Chairman advised that there had been a recent meeting of the Regulation Committee, at which a planning application in Martock had been refused. (Planning application 17/03874/OUT – Land adjoining Long Orchard Way, Martock). The Locality Manager agreed that he would arrange for feedback from the Regulation Committee meeting to be sent to members.

77.

Date of Next Meeting

Members are asked to note that the next scheduled meeting of the committee will be at the Council Offices, Churchfield, Wincanton on Wednesday 10th May at 9.00 am.

Minutes:

Members noted that the date of the next scheduled meeting of the committee will be at the Council Offices, Churchfield, Wincanton on Wednesday 9th May at 9am.

78.

Public Question Time

Minutes:

There were no questions from members of the public present.

79.

Chairman Announcements

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that all major planning applications that come before Area Committees would be 2-starred for a period of three months. Area East Committee would still be able to approve and condition major applications, however if minded to refuse a major application, contrary to the officer recommendation, the application would be referred to the Regulation Committee for determination. Members discussed the procedure for major planning applications and the scheme of delegation. He pointed out that this was due to SSDC being close to the threshold on appeals which were overturned by The Planning Inspectorate.

 

 

 

80.

Reports from Members

Minutes:

One member queried whether a planning application for the Constitutional Club was regarded as a major or a minor planning application by the planning team. He felt that it should have been considered as a major planning application as the application was for more than 10 houses. This member agreed that he would follow this up with the planning team.

 

Another member advised that the parish councils were no longer receiving paper copies of planning applications; however other members were unaware of this change. The Locality Manager agreed to follow this up with the planning team.

 

Another member advised that the extension to Wincanton Primary School had now opened.

 

On the subject of the A303 duelling, a report was being taken from Somerset County Council to Highways England. This was the final opportunity for members of the public to comment on the proposals. The Locality Officer agreed to send an e-mail to the parish clerks in Area East to highlight this.

81.

Report for Area East Committee on the Performance of the Streetscene Service pdf icon PDF 304 KB

Minutes:

The Environmental Services Manager presented his report to members. He advised that the annual work schedule had been the focus of a positive year. He advised that;

 

·         The previous seasons mowing had been completed on time and that the team were about to start the spring mowing.

·         Litter picking on the main roads has recently been completed and the team were about to start litter picking on the A303. Clearing of the A303 verges presented health and safety issues, however clearing should start shortly. He was currently considering options for clearing the central reservation. 

·         Additional litter bins have been provided to parishes.

·         Christmas Tree shredding was hugely popular.

·         Fly-tipping cases have reduced.

 

In response to a member’s question, he advised that litter picking equipment can be provided to Parish Councils and litter which has been picked up by those residents can be collected.

 

He also advised that tyre debris on the A303 can only be picked up from verges to the side of the highway. Tyres on the highway need to be removed by Highways England. 

 

Another member pointed out that there was a lot of litter in the verges close to the Dimmer site. The Environmental Services Manager advised that he would discuss this issue with the Somerset Waste Partnership.

 

Members thanked the Environmental Services Manager for his report.

82.

Area East End of Year Report 2017/18 pdf icon PDF 234 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Locality Manager presented his report to members. He highlighted some of the projects which had been undertaken in Area East;

 

·         The Business Network event at the Haynes Motor Museum was hugely successful and very well attended.

·         Property research report has been completed. This identified the Wincanton High Street as a corporate priority.

·         Retail Support Initiative continues to be effective. A report will follow in the next few months.

·         The land at Waterside is now in ownership, so improvements can now be implemented.

·         Community Led Planning is a focus for some communities.

·         The Queen Camel neighbourhood plan is still being developed. There is support and funding to help communities develop neighbourhood plans.

·         External funding is available for community groups.

·         There has been a reduction in footfall for visitors to community offices.

·         LIC contracts have been reviewed.

·         The Annual Town and Parish Meeting is taking place on 23rd April. The changes at the District Council and broadband in Area East will appear on the agenda.

 

In response to a member’s question, the Locality Manager agreed to promote the work which had been undertaken on the Limington cycle path to Sustrans.

 

Concern was raised over the future of the Wincanton Sports Ground and the SSCAT bus funding and felt that this should be a focus.

 

One member questioned whether the funding from Wimpy Homes had now been received by the Council as this would provide long term funding for the SSCAT bus. The Locality Manager agreed to look into this further.

 

Members noted the report.

 

83.

Area East Committee Forward Plan pdf icon PDF 23 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members requested a report on superfast broadband to appear on the May or June agenda for Area East Committee.

 

The Locality Manager suggested that the Area Development Plan report moved from the June agenda to the May agenda and that an additional report on the Balsam Centre was included on the May agenda. The Locality Manager confirmed that a report on the RSI would appear on a future agenda.

 

Members noted the forward plan and the suggested amendments.

84.

Action List (For Information Only) pdf icon PDF 62 KB

Minutes:

Members noted the Action List.

85.

Planning Appeals (For Information Only) pdf icon PDF 22 KB

Minutes:

Members noted that there were no new appeals or appeal decisions.

86.

Schedule of Planning Applications to be Determined by Committee pdf icon PDF 90 KB

Minutes:

Members noted the Schedule of Planning Applications to be determined by Committee.

87.

18/00123/COU - Pippins, Cary Road, North Cadbury pdf icon PDF 424 KB

Minutes:

Application Proposal: Alterations, the extension of side extension and change of use of garage to catering kitchen.

 

The Planning Officer presented his report to members with the aid of a Powerpoint presentation. He explained that the application was for an extension and change if use to an existing residential garage to form a catering kitchen.

 

Using Powerpoint, he provided images of the dwelling and neighbouring properties which were mostly large detached dwellings. He also advised that there was a stream which ran between the garage and a neighbouring property.

 

He explained that there were neighbour concerns over deliveries to the site as well as the hours of operation, odours and noise.

 

He advised members that it was his recommendation that the application be refused.

 

Mr M Hunt, representing himself as a member of the Parish Council, spoke in support of the application. He advised members that the road in which the garage was sited was a busy road and not a small rural lane and that there were bus stops and schools along this road. He pointed out that the Parish Council supported this application and that many people work and operate from home. He also pointed out that the effects from this application will be minimal and that there is no suggestion that other members of staff will be working on the site.

 

Mrs C Jeans, Mr A Smart (on behalf of Mr C and Mrs E Fuller), Mrs P Smart and Mr C Fone spoke in objection to the application. Their comments included;

 

·         North Cadbury is currently a quiet village

·         Will the garage windows be fixed shut and obscured?

·         Early morning noise will disrupt neighbouring children’s sleep

·         The delivery vans block the pavement.

·         This is the narrowest part of the road – there is no room for delivery vans.

·         Contrary to local plan

·         There will be no way to enforce staff numbers or deliveries on site.

·         Windows in garage will give unwanted light pollution.

·         Provides no employment opportunities and does not enhance the village

·         The site adjoins the Conservation Area and there are more suitable business units available just outside of the village.

 

Mr S Brenetony spoke in support of the application. He pointed out that there would be no deliveries as the applicants would collect produce themselves. He felt that small local businesses should be supported.

 

Ms A Conway, the applicant, addressed members. She advised that the kitchen would be used to prepare cold buffets and that this was a small scale business. She advised that food was not delivered to the site and that she collected it herself. She also advised that the food was prepared with domestic appliances only and confirmed that the commercial waste would be collected fortnightly. She referred to the NPPF and suggested that local sustainable growth should be encouraged to promote a strong local economy. She asked members to consider how important this would be to her business.

 

Councillor Nick Weeks, Ward Member, explained that he understood the neighbours’ concerns,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

88.

18/00219/FUL - Babwell Farm, Common Road, Cucklington pdf icon PDF 432 KB

Minutes:

Demolition of existing conservatory, the erection of a single storey and first floor extension along with the formation of a raised terrace.

 

(Councillor Sarah Dyke declared a personal, but non-prejudicial interest as she is a resident of the village)

 

The Planning Officer presented his report to members with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation to show photographs and plans to show the proposal. He advised that the three gables on the rear extension will all be below the height of the existing roof ridge and will not be visible from the front of the property. He advised that it was recommended that the application be approved.

 

Miss D Hammet, a representative of the Parish Meeting addressed the Committee. She explained that the extension was not in-keeping with the area and that most extensions in the village compliment and retain the charm of the village. She advised that this was a prominent historic building and that this was an extensive and contemporary designed extension, which would affect the neighbour’s amenity.

 

Mrs A Hopkins spoke in objection to the application. Her comments included;

 

·         It is against the design guide. The extension is enormous and will ruin the character of the building.

·         Cladding is not in-keeping.

·         There will be different tiles on the rear of the property and extension.

·         The extension will be visible as the property sits at an angle to the road.

·         The design and access statement submitted by the applicant suggests that there will be further extensions to the property.

 

Further photographs which had been submitted by another objector were shown.

 

Mr A Jarvis, the agent, addressed members of the Committee. He advised that the timber cladding was chosen as it was lightweight and would weather and become grey over time to blend in with the landscape. He advised that the extension would be single storey past the point which it would project further than the neighbour’s property. He suggested that the extension would not dominate the landscape and was only an 18% increase on the exiting footprint. He hoped that this carefully considered extension would be approved.

 

Mrs V Pothecary, representing her son who was the applicant, addressed members. She advised that her son had obtained pre-application advice and notified the immediate neighbours. She advised that the owner of Rosebank did not raise any concern and has not objected to the application. She also advised that the other immediate neighbour had not submitted an objection to the planning application. She suggested that the application complied with the local plan.

 

Councillor Mike Beech, Ward Member, advised members that he was not in favour of the application and that he thought it would dominate over the adjoining property, Rosebank and would result in a loss of privacy.

 

During the discussion, the Area Lead Planning Officer advised that pre-application advice had been published as it formed part of the applicants’ submission, which was not unusual. He also confirmed that the property was not in a Conservation Area, nor was it a listed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88.

89.

17/04588/REM - Vedelers Hey, Balsam Park, Wincanton pdf icon PDF 938 KB

Minutes:

Application Proposal: Application for reserved matters following approval of 15/0288/OUT to include details of accesses, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer presented his report to members. He explained that the application had been deferred from the previous month’s meeting to allow further negotiations to take place between the applicant and Somerset County Council as to whether the road could be adopted and to seek legal advice over the legality  of proposed condition 11.

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer advised that no solution had been found to enable the road to be adopted by Somerset County Council. He also confirmed that the proposed condition 11 was lawful and appropriate.

 

Mrs C Brace, Development Manager at Stonewater addressed the Committee. She advised members that the application was for 15 affordable homes and hoped that the application would be approved. She explained that the access road would not be adopted by Somerset County Council, that it would be of an adoptable standard and suggested that this should not be a reason for refusal. She further explained that the road would be delivered, managed and maintained by way of a management contract and a unilateral undertaking which had been agreed and was ready to be signed.

 

She explained to members that a reduction in homes to enable an alternative drainage scheme would make the application unviable and pointed out that no objections had been received from statutory consultees.

 

Councillor Colin Winder, Ward Member, advised that a S106 was agreed at the outline approval stage and suggested than an informative should be included to remind the applicant of this agreement. He also suggested that condition 11 did not comply with paragraphs 203 and 204 of the NPPF and should be removed as it was a legal matter and should be dealt with by a legal agreement. Councillor Mike Lewis suggested that it should be dealt with by way of an informative.

 

Councillor Nick Colbert, also Ward Member, advised that he was disappointed that the road could not be adopted and felt that the number of houses could have been reduced to enable the drainage issues to be resolved. He explained that he could not offer support as the road would not be adopted by Somerset County Council.

 

Following the discussion, it was proposed and seconded that the application be approved subject to an additional informative to advise the applicant that there was a s106 agreed at outline stage and to replace proposed condition 11 with a similar informative relating to the existing access and subject to the signing of the unilateral agreement.

 

The Senior Planning Lawyer advised that condition 11 was lawful but that it was ultimately a matter for members to decide whether to impose it or not.

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer pointed out to members that it would always be preferable to add a condition rather than a legal agreement where possible.

 

On being put to the vote, this was carried 8 votes in support, 2 against with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.