Agenda, decisions and minutes

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 21^st November 2018 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Marcus Barrett, Carol Goodall, Jenny Kenton, Garry Shortland and Angie Singleton.

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 Mike Best, Angie Singleton and Martin Wale.

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 Martin Wale declared a personal interest in Planning Application No. 18/00746/OUT – Pear Tree, Wadeford, Chard, as he lived in Wadeford and the applicant was known to him.

During the item, Councillor Val Keitch declared a personal interest in Planning Application No. 18/01311/OUT – Land OS 4538 The Pound, Broadway Road, Broadway, as a friend lived in an adjacent property to the application site.

Councillors are requested to note that the next Area West Committee meeting is scheduled to be held on Wednesday 16^th January 2019 at 5.30pm at the Guildhall, Chard.

Members noted that the next meeting of the Area West Committee would be held on Wednesday 16^th January 2019 at 5.30pm at The Guildhall, Chard.

This is a chance to ask questions, make comments and raise matters of concern.

Parish/Town Councils may also wish to use this opportunity to ask for the District Council’s support on any matter of particular concern to their Parish/Town.

Anyone wishing to raise matters in relation to items on the agenda may do so at the time the item is considered.

The Committee was addressed by a member of the public in relation to a planning application for the erection of buildings to store and erect carnival floats in Kingstone parish.  She referred to the unsuitability of the site and the lack of infrastructure and asked if SSDC could work with Kingstone Parish Meeting and Ilminster Town Council to try and find an alternative site for the Carnival Clubs to use. 

The Chairman announced that Cllr. Carol Goodall would be standing down as Vice Chairman of Area West Committee and a new appointment would be made in January.

The Chairman informed members that Helen Rutter, Communities Lead was leaving SSDC at the end of the year and wished to thank her for all her hard work and commitment to Area West Committee.  Members reiterated their thanks and wished Helen all the very best for the future.

Reason:  To update members on the work of the Blackdown Hills AONB Partnership and agree in principle to the continuation of core funding.

The Locality Team Manager introduced the report which provided an update on the activities and projects carried out by the Blackdown Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) Partnership.  He explained that members were being asked to agree in principle to continue the SSDC contribution to the core funding and that a further report would be submitted in March seeking adoption of the AONB Management Plan and to formally endorse SSDC’s funding contribution.

He welcomed Tim Youngs, AONB Manager to the meeting.  With the aid of a powerpoint presentation, the AONB Manager informed members about the following:

·         Community Nature Projects with local communities

·         Nature and Wellbeing Project -  Memory Café sessions in Chard

·         Guided sessions at Folly Farm for members of the Watch Project

·         Naturally Healthy Month in May

·         Revised version of the Landscape Character Assessment which covers all of the Blackdown Hills would be published at the end of 2018/19

·         Work in 2019/20 would include ash dieback mitigation and public engagement via Trees Outside Woods, extending and expanding volunteering role plus nature in and wellbeing work and engaging with primary schools at Combe St Nicholas and Buckland St Mary.

Cllr. Martin Wale, the appointed representative on the Partnership Management Group commented that the AONB delivered a fantastic amount of work with the funding received.

The AONB Manager responded to members’ questions and comments on points of detail.

Members thanked the AONB Manager for the work undertaken by the Partnership and unanimously approved the recommendations of the report.

Reason:  To update members on the work of the Blackdown Hills AONB Partnership and agree in principle to the continuation of core funding.

The Lead Specialist Strategic Planning presented the report. She explained that the contents of the Area West Chapter had been developed using the outcomes of the member workshop and also included a review of current area delivery plans.  She explained that the key priorities would be monitored on a bi-monthly basis and a progress report would be presented to the Area West Committee.  She proposed a minor amendment to the second bullet point under Economy to include Community Partnerships.

During discussion the Locality Team Manager and Lead Specialist Strategic Planning noted the comments from members and responded to questions.  Members were informed that:

·         The next step was to produce Delivery Plans for each of the key priorities and identify officers to lead on the projects and identify achievements for the year;

·         Area Committees would receive 6 monthly progress reports and in time information on individual projects would also be available through the Members Portal as progress is made with using the members portal for access to information;

·         Members asked if the delivery of a swimming pool in Chard could be added to the paragraph on pitch provision.  Officers noted it was a long term project which formed part of the Chard Regeneration Scheme and progress would therefore be reported through the relevant programme board. Officers agreed to sense check this with relevant lead officers;

·         Some priorities had also been identified in other areas and would be included elsewhere in the Council Plan;

·         The Locality Team would still have capacity to support parishes with Neighbourhood Plans and Community Plans.

At the conclusion of the debate, members agreed the priorities for the Area to be presented to District Executive for consideration for inclusion in the Council Plan.

Chard & District Museum

Members noted the update report submitted by Cllr. Amanda Broom.

The Communities Lead informed members of the following updates to the Area West Committee Forward Plan:

·         Appointment of Vice Chairman would be considered at the January meeting

·         AONB Management Plan to be added to the Forward Plan in March

·         The Area West Delivery Plan to be included - date to be confirmed

It was also agreed to defer the update on Ilminster Forum to the February meeting.

Members noted the report detailing a planning appeal that had been received.

Members noted the schedule of planning applications to be determined by the Committee.

Application proposal: Outline planning application with all matters reserved aside from the access for the erection of up to 35 dwellings and associated works (resubmission of 17/04239/OUT)

The Area Lead Planner (North & West) presented the application as detailed in the agenda and with the aid of a powerpoint presentation showed the indicative layout plan and photographs of the site including the access.  He explained that the application was a resubmission of a previous application which had been withdrawn.  He advised that there had been minor revisions to the attenuation pond details and tree protection measures.  A meeting had also been held with Highways and it had been agreed that the hedgerows would be cut back to provide visibility.  He referred to the key considerations which were principle of development, housing need/local plan housing strategy, highways/parking, landscape, residential amenity, ecology and local infrastructure.  There were no updates to the report, however, he noted that Alder King had submitted a briefing note to all members prior to the Committee meeting.

Following the Officer’s presentation, Cllr. Val Keitch declared a personal interest in the item as a friend lived in a property adjacent to the site.

In response to member’s questions, the Area Lead Planner (North & West) advised that:

·         As the Council could not demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing only limited weight could be attached to Policy SS2;

·         The Council’s Ecologist raised no objections to the application;

·         The applicant was suggesting additional planting to compensate for the loss of hedgerow;

·         He had weighed up all the issues including reduction and extent of the site and character of the village and concluded that the landscape impact was not severe enough to warrant refusal of the application;

·         Scale of development and cumulative impact was a material consideration;

·         If members considered there to be sufficient harm to warrant refusal of the scheme, they would need to set out in detail the harm the scheme was imposing;

·         County Education were not requesting a contribution.

A representative from Broadway Parish Council raised a number of concerns with regard to the application.  Points raised related to:

·         If the application were to be approved, housing in Broadway would increase by a third in ten years.  The increase was incompatible with SS2 which was intended to protect rural settlements from housing expansion on this scale;

·         The Health Centre capacity was counterbalanced by the primary schools inability to cope with the influx of extra pupils;

·         The need for Affordable Housing was not quantified;

·         The Parish Council had sent a long detailed letter opposing the application which was attached to the agenda.

The Committee was addressed by two members of the public in support of the application.  Comments raised included the following:

·         The application provided affordable housing;

·         The village had many people that wished to stay or return to the village;

·         The development would help support local facilities.

The Applicant’s Agent advised that public consultation had been undertaken on the proposal and that as a result of concerns raised the number  ...  view the full minutes text for item 96.

Application Proposal: The erection of a 1 No. dwelling and detached garage with associated parking

(Cllr Martin Wale declared a personal interest in the application as he lived in Wadeford and the applicant was known to him)

The Planning Lead (North & West) presented the application with the aid of a powerpoint presentation and highlighted the key considerations.  He explained that the application was seeking outline planning permission and to agree access arrangements with all detailed matters reversed for later consideration.  He advised that Wadeford was considered to be an unsustainable location and was remote from facilities and local services and the application was therefore recommended for refusal.

In response to member questions, the Planning Lead informed members of the following:

·         SS2 applied to rural settlements which stated that two or more services and facilities must be provided and Wadeford only had one;

·         The need to travel was contrary to the aims and objectives of sustainable development as outlined in the Local Plan;

·         Land ownership was a civil matter and could not be considered as part of the planning application.

The Committee was addressed by the Applicant.  He explained his personal circumstances and the reasons for making the application.  He commented that the site was surrounded by dwellings and was not isolated.  He referred to policies in the NPPF acknowledging development in one village supporting services in another village.   

Ward Member, Cllr. Martin Wale noted that the Parish Council supported the application and that there were no issues with visibility and the access could be negotiated.  He advised that the objections would be dealt with when the full application was considered.  He did not agree that the site was unsustainable as Wadeford was only one mile from the Chard boundary and was close to Combe St Nicholas which had various facilities including a school, shop, village hall, public house and two churches.  He also advised that there was a bus stop opposite the Haymaker public house.

During the discussion, a number of members supported the views of the Ward Member and did not consider the location to be unsustainable.

It was proposed and seconded to approve the application contrary to the Planning Officer’s recommendation for the following reasons:

·         Sustainable form of development

·         Safe means of access

·         No adverse harm to neighbouring amenity

Conditions suggested by the Planning Lead (North & West) and agreed by members included:

·         Time

·         Submission of detailed matters (appearance, landscaping, scale & layout)

·         Proof of site plan

·         Limit to one dwelling

·         Tree protection

·         Highways

·         Surface water

·         Construction management plan

A vote was taken and the application was unanimously approved.