Agenda item

Proposal: Section 73 application to vary condition no. 25 of planning approval 10/03704/FUL dated 17/05/2013 to amend the list of approved drawings to amend house types.

Before presenting the application, the Planning Officer highlighted an error in the report – on page 58 under the heading of Leisure Policy – the report incorrectly referred to contributions for Martock and this should instead have stated a verbal update would be reported to the meeting.

She also noted that if members were minded to approve the application then some change to conditions were required:

·         Condition 25 – change of drawing number

·         Addition conditional regarding geo-physical data

·         Conditions 6,10,11 and 16 – applicant had requested if the conditions could be changed so that they are agreed after commencement to enable ground works to go ahead

The Planning Officer presented the application as detailed in the report and noted it was now a different house builder to the original applicant, and they wished to build a slightly different house style. As this was a S73 application there had been a requirement to reconsider the planning obligations. She highlighted the main reason the application was before members was because the required contributions had reduced due to a change in the way they were calculated.

Mr D Harrison, spokesman for Somerton Town Council, noted they supported the application regarding changes to the dwelling styles but they did not support the reduction in contributions. They fully accepted the need to re-evaluate the contributions but did not agree with the process. He felt Somerton Town Council needed to be fully advised and consulted before the application was considered by the committee. A major reduction in funding towards the changing rooms was proposed with very little chance for the town council to comment.

Mr T Bown, spoke in a personal capacity in objection to the proposal. He made reference to the proximity of local play areas and also did not support the closing off of Bancombe Road.

Ward member, Councillor Dean Ruddle, noted he had only been made aware of the changes to contributions the previous week, and then those figures had been updated in the last few days as some figures were incorrect. He asked that the application was deferred for more negotiations and information.

Ward member, Councillor Stephen Page concurred with his fellow ward member that the application should be deferred.

During a short discussion members expressed their support for deferral of the application and comments raised included:

·         Members needed to be in receipt of all the facts before making a decision

·         Old figures no longer felt justified given changes in policies

·         Errors in the report did not make for easy decision making

In response to other comments made the Area Lead, Locum Planning Solicitor and Community Health & Leisure Manager clarified that:

·         This was not a new application but a variation to the original one.

·         There was no roll-over clause in the original S.106 agreement

·         There was definitely no money relating to this site going to Martock.

·         Money was still being sought for local projects but at a reduced amount due to changes in adopted policies.

It was proposed to defer the application for consultations on the reduced leisure contributions and for an updated report to be prepared. On being put to the vote, the proposal was carried unanimously.

(Voting: Unanimous)