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

41.

Minutes of Previous Meeting

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 11th July 2018.

Minutes:

The minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 11th July, copies of which had been circulated, were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

42.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies of absence.  

43.

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 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, gain, or advantage to SCC, which would be at the cost, or to the financial disadvantage to SSDC.

44.

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 12th September at 9.00am.

Minutes:

Members noted that the date of the next meeting of the committee would be at the Council Offices, Churchfields, Wincanton on Wednesday 12th September at 9am.

45.

Public Question Time

Minutes:

There were no questions from members of the public.

46.

Chairman Announcements

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that he had spoken to the Senior Planning Advisor to discuss a planning workshop which had been requested by members. 

 

He explained to members that due to staff leave within the planning office and the on-going Transformation Project that it was now suggested that this workshop would take place in the New Year. He further explained that by postponing the workshop, the design of the service would be more concrete and hoped that the other Chairs and Vice-Chairmen of the other area committees could also be involved.

 

In response to a members question, the Neighbourhood Development Officer advised that additional staffing resource were being drawn from the area teams to assist the planning department with site notices.

47.

Reports from Members

Minutes:

Councillor Anna Groskop advised that she had attended the SSCAT bus AGM. She informed the Chairman that the SSCAT bus wanted to personally thank him for his efforts to help the future of the service. However, she explained that there were still problems ahead for the service as the government had not yet decided whether drivers would need to undertake an expensive PCV licence, which would force some drivers to stop volunteering.

 

It was agreed that a letter would be written to both MP’s to express the Committee’s concern over the future of the SSCAT bus should these licences be required and to explain the strong support given by local communities to the SSCAT bus over the recent months.

 

On another matter, she also explained that she would be keen to see a letter due to be sent to parish and town clerks to explain how CIL money could be spent by Parish and Town Councils.

 

Councillor Mike Lewis advised that the consent order had been submitted to Highways England for the proposal to dual the A303 between Sparkford and Podimore. He advised that Highways England had established a Community Forum to consider the proposed amendments to the A358 between Ilminster and Taunton and suggested that the local community, around the A303 proposals, felt disadvantaged by not having a similar ‘once voice’ forum. However, he added that SCC and the district council had both been very supportive.

48.

Area East Committee Forward Plan pdf icon PDF 23 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Neighbourhood Development Officer clarified amendments to the forward plan to reflect the names of officers that be delivering the reports and advised that the Forward Plan would be updated. She also explained that an Economic Development Strategy Workshop was planned for after the September committee meeting and suggested that the Wincanton Regeneration Programme could be considered at the same workshop.

 

She also suggested that the Area East Priorities could be delivered as a workshop rather than a report.

 

Members expressed their concern that there was no mention of the Artificial Grass Pitch within the Area East Priorities as they felt that this was an important priority for the residents of Area East. It was agreed that this concern would be raised at the Economic Development Strategy Workshop.

 

In response to a members question in relation to an Artificial Grass Pitch, she suggested that this should be discussed further at the Economic Development Strategy Workshop.

 

Members noted the Forward Plan and the suggested amendments.

49.

Planning Appeals (For information only) pdf icon PDF 79 KB

Minutes:

Members noted the planning appeals list.

50.

Schedule of Planning Applications to be Determined by Committee pdf icon PDF 92 KB

Minutes:

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

51.

18/01545/S73A - Woodland Escape, Nr. Midknowle Farm, North Barrow pdf icon PDF 562 KB

Minutes:

Application Proposal: Application to remove condition 8 (use of site between March and October inclusive) of approval 15/01078/COU)

 

(The Chairman advised that he had previously worked on the site, however advised that he did not have a personal interest in the site)

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer presented his report to members. He explained that the application was to vary or remove condition 8 of planning application 15/01078/COU, which was approved in November 2015. He explained to members that condition 8 of this earlier approval required all equipment and structures on site to be removed between the winter months of November and February. This condition had been applied to ensure that the campsite was not visible during the winter months when hedgerows would lose their leaves and may not screen the site.

 

Using a PowerPoint presentation, he provided images to identify the location of the site and plans to show the layout of holiday accommodation units on the site. He also provided photographs to show the access to the site.

 

He advised members that he had seen the structures on site and having assessed the impact, he felt that the application to remove the condition was acceptable. He stated that the trees surrounding the area were quite dense and offered good screening.

 

The applicant addressed members. He advised that the site is currently cleared during the months of November to February, which took a lot of hard work to safely remove and store all item from the site. He explained to members that tourism in the UK is thriving and that this should be supported by local councils. He pointed out that his visitors helped the local economy by ordering local takeaways, eating local produce and eating in local restaurants

 

He also drew members attention to some photographs which had been provided to the Area Lead Planning Officer which showed the access to the site, taken in winter months.

 

Councillor Henry Hobhouse, Ward Member, advised members that he had no concerns over the application and that the site could not be easily viewed in the winter months.

 

Councillor Nick Weeks, also Ward Member, expressed concern that should the site be sold, that the campsite could be used for more permanent visitors and felt that a period of closure of the site provided a good opportunity to ensure that residents on the site would be holiday-makers only and not permanent residents. He suggested that a reduced period of closure to possibly one month would be more appropriate.

 

In response to a question from a member, the Area Lead Planning Officer confirmed that the time limit for commencement has also been removed from the list of proposed condition as this was no longer appropriate as the work had started and the business was up and running. 

 

During the discussion, some members supported the suggestion of closing the site for only one month but to allow all equipment to remain on the site during this period of closure.

 

One member questioned  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

52.

18/01067/FUL - Land and Buildings at Rodgrove House Farm, Moor Lane, Wincanton pdf icon PDF 525 KB

Minutes:

Application Proposal: The erection of an agricultural workers dwelling

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer presented his report to members. He advised that the application for the erection of an agricultural workers dwellings. Using a PowerPoint presentation, he provided images to show the location of the site and the proposed plans.

 

He also provided photographs to show the site and existing buildings on the site.

 

He advised that the size of the proposed dwelling was significantly larger than the policy recommended and included a study and office, which are already provided elsewhere onsite.

 

He explained that he was satisfied that the functional requirements of the farm had been met in line with policies. However, there were some concerns over the history of the farm and the size and specification of the proposed dwelling.

 

The Lead Specialist referred to comments on page 24 of the agenda where the Planning Officer had summarised his investigation over the history of the site to ensure that the system was not being abused. He agreed that the comments within the report had been written slightly emotively and agreed that this conclusion could have been worded more appropriately.

 

A member questioned a figure quoted on page 20 under point 4.2 as he felt that this was incorrect. The agent addressed committee and explained that the quoted 1,250 on page 20 should read 9,936.

 

The agent continued to advise members on the planning application. He explained that the dwelling at Temple Lane Farm had been sold to allow the applicants to keep Rodgrove Farm. He advised that it was sold as an agricultural workers dwelling.

 

He commented that the report refers to the spirit of policy HG9 and felt that the policy should be judged on what it actually says. Both himself and the applicants resent the comments in the report which suggest that the situation has been played or abused. He explained that the proposed dwelling is 17% above the guide size for agricultural workers dwellings if excluding all non-residential elements and asked why farmers should only be allowed modest homes in which to live in?

 

He explained that the labour requirement set out in the farming appraisal were equivalent to 4.5 workers and advised that there was only one modest home on the farm.  He informed members that the proposed dwelling was for a 4 bedroom home which would be constructed from natural stone and clay tiles which would be taken from former buildings on the site. He also pointed out the parish council have not objected to this application.

 

The applicant addressed the committee. She explained that she had farmed at the site for 35 years and explained that there had been a recent family dispute and ongoing legal battle, which resulted in the sale of Temple Lane Farm. She explained that she was disappointed to read the Planning Officers personal opinion within the report and felt that the facts were not clear for the committee members. She advised members that she received letters of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

53.

18/01174/DPO - Vedelers Hey, Balsam Park, Wincanton pdf icon PDF 922 KB

Minutes:

Application Proposal: Application to vary S106 agreement dated 31st March 2017 between SSDC, Somerset County Council, Caroline Anne (otherwise Annie) Melville Boxall and Annie Margaret Nora Melville Elcomb (deceased) acting through Executors to vary affordable housing contributions

 

The Planning Officer presented his report to members. He advised that the application had been submitted retrospectively to vary the S106 which was agreed at the time of the outline approval.

 

He summarised that the agreed S106 specified that of the 35% affordable homes on the site, 80% should be social rent and only 20% intermediate housing. The variation was to amend the 35% affordable home to a 100% intermediate affordable type of housing or in this case ‘rent to buy’.

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer presented a timetime of events, which had led to this application, and the reasons why the application was now being considered retrospectively.

 

He explained that in2015, an outline application was submitted and was subsequently was approved in 2017 as a delegated decision. The permission was subject to a S106 agreement to secure 35% affordable homes.

 

In 2017, a reserved matters application was submitted and whilst being considered a deed of variation was submitted to the council to vary the S106 to allow all of the 35% affordable homes to be intermediate rent, or in this case ‘rent to buy’. This was agreed.

 

In 2018, the reserved matters application was approved, subject to a requirement to comply with the existing S106, additional conditions and a unilateral undertaking to cover the ongoing maintenance and management of the site.

 

The Area Lead Planning Officer advised members that the deed of variation should not have been agreed before the council had considered this DPO application. He explained that the proposed amendments met policy requirements and saw no reason why the DPO would not have been approved.  He advised that this agreement cannot be undone and advised that the application was essentially for information only.

 

Councillor Colin Winder, Ward Member, questioned the dates on which documents were received and signed by SSDC. He felt that the planning team had opportunities to consult the ward members, however they were not consulted. He further added that the District Valuer had not been consulted and was upset that he had not been involved as the Ward Member.

 

Councillor Nick Colbert, also Ward Member, agreed with the comments made by Councillor Winder. He explained that the application had been approved without roads that could be adopted by the county council and expressed his disappointment that the application was at committee for information only following an error.

 

The Lead Specialist explained how he thought the error may have occurred.

 

During the discussion, members discussed the site and the problems with the unadoptable roads, however the Lead Specialist advised that these issues had been dealt with in the unilateral undertaking agreement.

 

One member pointed out an error in the report. The Area Lead Planning Office agreed that Policy HG9 should read Policy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.