Agenda, decisions and minutes

A member requested that the minutes indicate that Councillor Cathy Bakewell left the meeting prior to the close and that this be included in the minutes. The Democratic Services Officer confirmed that the minutes should record when Councillors arrive late or leave early from committee and that this had been omitted in this instance.

Members were happy that this be included in the minutes of the meeting held on the 30^th November 2016, copies of which had been circulated, be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to the amendment being made.

Apologies for Absence were received from Councillors Kaysar Hussain and Sam McAllister.

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 District Council’s Regulation Committee

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

Councillors Peter Gubbins, Graham Oakes, David Recardo and Gina Seaton.

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.

Councillor David Recardo declared a personal interest in Item 7 – Lyde Road/Sherborne Road Improvement Scheme as he lived along Lyde Road.

There were no questions from members of the public.

The Chairman asked the Assistant Director (Communities) to update on the broadband query:

·         Members heard about the issue of poor broadband speeds at Yeovil Marsh raised at Public questions in December.  Natalie Fortt made contact with the Parish and attended a meeting with BT, organised by the clerk, later in December.  It was very well attended by residents.

BT couldn’t install Fibre under the current 90% scheme but could help with a community led solution if wanted.  Natalie gave details about the Phase 2 roll out of SFBB to 95% of premises which may be available to Yeovil Marsh.  More details will be known in the next 2 months.  The successful bidder for SSDC area has been appointed (Giggerclear) and a new voucher scheme to help communities that remain out of scope is possible as well.

The meeting agreed to await the further details of the Phase 2 scheme, as if the village is eligible this may offer the best solution.

Plan B is to work with BT on a community led Fibre scheme.

This is an opportunity for Members who represent the Council on outside organisations to report items of interest to the Committee.

Councillor John Clark on behalf of the Westfield Community Association encouraged members to promote the ongoing Energy Advice Centres as attendance was regrettably quite low.  He also informed members that the Community Hall was at lottery application stage and hopeful this would progress to the Stage 2. 

The Chairman introduced Alyn Jones, Interim Director Economic & Community Infrastructure and Operation Director and Phil Lowndes, Strategic Manager for Traffic and Transport Development for Somerset County Council (SCC) explaining to members the decision to bring this Item to Committee for members to ask questions to these officers regarding the traffic issues relating to the Lyde Road junction improvements and related Eastern Corridor in Yeovil.

Marcus Fysh, MP for Yeovil Constituency then addressed the committee. He raised concern regarding the implementation of the scheme and the general principles of congestion in the town including;

1.    To ensure priority regarding Pedestrians

2.    Level of development in and around the outskirts of the town in particular where Section106 agreements can help and the issues faced should these agreements be rescinded for viability reasons.

3.    Regeneration of the town itself, with guidance from SSDC regarding regeneration of the town can assist SCC to plan for traffic in the town and help the local businesses operate and grow.

He hoped members would take on board these comments as believes this scheme interferes with some of these issues.

Adrian Dening, Margaret O’Neil, David Stone, Nigel Groves, Linda Whitsun-Jones and Clive Seaton all members of the public then addressed the committee.  Various comments were made including:

·         Referred to the temporary traffic lights at the junction over the Christmas period resulting in severe traffic congestion in the area and the relatively free flow of traffic once these traffic lights were removed.

·         Believed a roundabout in this area would be a better option then the proposed traffic light system. 

·         The backup of traffic which could be caused from the traffic wishing to turn right into St Michaels Avenue and any future options to alleviate congestion, for example a filter right hand lane.

·         Can see no justification for the traffic lights at the Lyde Road junction and believes the operation of the downstream signal system at Reckleford are a continued problem and extra traffic lights will result in further chaos.

·         Appreciate the realignment of the large stone wall which allows further scope for a roundabout at the junction.

·         Complete waste of time and money as the current situation although not ideal does allow free flowing traffic and better than the proposed signal system resulting in more traffic stop time.

·         A lot of pain for not a lot of gain, with local businesses being severely affected by these unnecessary roadworks.

·         Yet another unnecessary traffic scheme within Yeovil Town which will result in preventing people coming into the town.

·         Concern was also raised regarding the new layout at the Horsey Lane roundabout and the problems caused by the traffic light system and the stopping and backlog of traffic onto the roundabout wishing to turn left into Hendford.

·         Considers the new layout of the hospital only concentrates the traffic and not disperse it.

Councillor Tony Lock Ward member explained the issues and reason for the attendance of the SCC Officers and believed that there was no one person to blame.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 109.

The Assistant Director, Communities informed members that the Annual report on the works of the Conservation Unit be removed from the Forward Plan at this time and that the Historic Buildings at Risk confidential report would be brought to the March committee.  There were no further updates.

It was again requested and agreed that a site visit be arranged for the committee to view the new facilities at the Westland Leisure Complex.  The Democratic Services Officers confirmed that a request has been made to the Assistant Director, Health and Well-being and that she would follow this up.

(Voting: Without dissent)

Members noted the Planning Appeals.

Members noted the Schedule of Planning Applications.

The Area Lead South presented the application as detailed in the agenda and with the aid of a power point gave a presentation showing the site and proposed plans. 

He explained that at the meeting of Area South Committee on 30^th November 2016 member’s resolved to defer the application to undertake a site visit and that this site visit took place prior to today’s meeting.  He reiterated the main points for concern being; Parking and Access, Overlooking and Shadowing. He considered the proposed parking on site exceeded the policy requirement and believed the visibility splay acceptable on the basis that the removal of the trees or retaining wall would be far more harmful to the setting of the conservation area than the current situation. 

He also referred to slides showing the first floor window analysis confirming which windows on the proposed east side elevation would be partly obscured.  He believed that although the proposal would bring some further shadowing of the gardens to neighbouring properties at certain times of the day on balance this did not warrant refusal of the application.  .

He concluded that on the basis of all the information provided and with the amendment to condition 5 his recommendation was for approval for reasons as set out in the agenda report.

Mr Andy Harrison the owner of No. 11 Willow Road addressed the committee and spoke in objection to the application.  His main concern was the mass of the proposed extension and the overbearing impact and overshadowing this would have on his and surrounding properties.  He also raised concern regarding the onsite parking and the current parking issues within the area and believed that the additional intake of staff, residents and visitors for the care home will only exacerbate the issue and have a detrimental effect on the neighbourhood. 

Mr Graham Herridge, a local resident spoke in objection to the application.  He believed that the development would have a detrimental effect on the visual amenity of the area and due to the density and overbearing mass of the proposal result in the loss of light and privacy of the adjacent properties.  He felt the need to safeguard the setting of the conservation area, appreciated that members had visited the site and note the recommendation for refusal of this application from Yeovil Town Council. 

Mr David Marks, the resident of No. 9 Willow road also spoke in objection to the application.  He felt the development would overshadow his property blocking any visible skyline and natural light and did not consider an extension of this size was necessary.  He believed that the well-being of local residents was a main consideration.

Mr Andrew Tregay, the agent then addressed the committee.  He endorsed the officer’s report and explained the requirement to update care homes and the ongoing need for the elderly.  He noted that no other objections had been received and that the applicant had worked hard to address any issues already raised including the undertaking of a shadow assessment.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.

RESOLVED:

that the following item be considered in Closed Session by virtue of the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12A under Paragraph 3: “Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).” 

RESOLVED:

That the Committee, acting as trustees for the Portreeves or Corporation Almshouses, agreed to, subject to any appropriate consent or approvals required from the Charity Commission,

a)    Approve the principle of acquisition of a two bedroomed property in Yeovil.

b)    Approve the principle of undertaking any necessary repair works prior to allocation of the dwelling

c)    Approve expenditure from the Trust’s consolidated funds to cover the reasonable costs of an independent qualified surveyor.

d)    Delegate to the Chair of the Committee, subject to the formal advice from the independant qualified surveyor, approval of the negotiated price.

e)    Approve the principle of entering into a management agreement for this property with a partner Housing Association.

f)     Delegate to the Chair of the Committee conclusion of appropriate terms within this agreement.

g)    Resolve to set the occupation charge for this property.

(voting: unanimous)

The Corporate Strategic Housing Manager presented the confidential report explaining the reason and process with regards to gaining approval from the committee, acting as trustees for the Portreeves or Corporation Almshouses for the potential acquisition of a property, appointment of a management agent and setting of new rent regime. 

During discussion members appreciated the reasons why a previous proposed acquisition did not proceed and also the obligations to meet the needs of the Trust.  After careful consideration it was proposed and seconded to agree the recommendations as set out in the agenda report.  On being put to the vote this was carried unanimously. 

Following a further short discussion, it was also proposed that any future decision to approve the proposed potential acquisition of a 2 bedroom property can be made in liaison with the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting as trustees for the Portreeves or Corporation Almshouses in consultation with the Corporate Strategic Housing Officer.  On being put to the vote this was carried unanimously.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee, acting as trustees for the Portreeves or Corporation Almshouses, agreed to, subject to any appropriate consent or approvals required from the Charity Commission,

a)    Approve the principle of acquisition of a two bedroomed property in Yeovil.

b)    Approve the principle of undertaking any necessary repair works prior to allocation of the dwelling

c)    Approve expenditure from the Trust’s consolidated funds to cover the reasonable costs of an independent qualified surveyor.

d)    Delegate to the Chair of the Committee, subject to the formal advice from the independent qualified surveyor, approval of the negotiated price.

e)    Approve the principle of entering into a management agreement for this property with a partner Housing Association.

f)     Delegate to the Chair of the Committee conclusion of appropriate terms within this agreement.

g)    Resolve to set the occupation charge for this property.

(voting: unanimous)