Agenda and minutes

The Chair will ask the Committee Administrator to draw attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out under Note 6

The Senior Democratic Services Officer read out the procedure

A Vice Chair was not desired

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors David Martin and Doug Nicol and their substitutes were Councillors Manda Rigby and Caroline Roberts respectively

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number and site in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson declared an interest in the planning applications at Bath Spa University Campus, Newton St Loe (Items 2&3, Report 10) as she used to work at the University but left under acrimonious circumstances and as a result would not feel impartial – she would therefore leave the meeting for their consideration. Councillor Liz Hardman stated that she used to teach at St Gregory’s Catholic College, Combe Hay Lane, Odd Down, Bath (Item 7, Report 10) but considered that she had no interest and would therefore speak and vote on the matter.

There was none

The Senior Democratic Services Officer informed the meeting that there was a member of the public wishing to make a statement on the Tree Preservation Order at 1 Devonshire Place, Bath (Report 12) and that he would be able to do so when that Item was reached on the Agenda. There were also various people wishing to make statements on planning applications and they would be able to do so when reaching their respective applications in Report 10.

There was none

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 29^th August 2012

The Minutes of the meeting held on 29^th August 2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair subject to the word “disbenefits” in Item 1 relating to the Town Hall, The Centre, Keynsham, of Minute 49 being replaced by “drawbacks”.

The Senior Professional – Major Developments to provide an oral update

The Chair informed the meeting that he had been advised that there were no updates to be reported on major developments but that, if Members had any queries, they could contact the Senior Professional – Major Developments direct

The Committee considered:

·  a report by the Development Manager on various planning applications

·  an Update Report by the Development Manager on Item Nos 5&6, a copy of which is attached as Appendix 1

·  oral statements by members of the public etc on Item Nos 1-10, the Speakers being attached as Appendix 2

RESOLVED that, in accordance with their delegated powers, the applications be determined as set out in the Decisions List attached as Appendix 3.

Item 1 Stowey Quarry, Stowey Road, Stowey – Restoration of Stowey Quarry by landfilling of Stable Non-Reactive Hazardous Waste (SNRHW) including asbestos and inert wastes and that the application is accompanied by an environmental statement – The Council’s Consultant reported on this application and the recommendation to refuse permission. He referred to further representations received from Dr Dickerson and the Stowey Sutton Action Group.

The public speakers made their statements on the application. The Development Manager read out a statement from the Environment Agency. Councillors Jeremy Sparks and Tim Warren, Ward Members for Clutton and Mendip respectively, made statements against the proposal. Councillor Vic Pritchard, the Ward Member, made a statement against the proposal and considered that issues raised by the Action Group should be included in the reasons for refusal. The Chair commented on some of the comments made by Members. The Development Manager informed the Committee that the recommended reasons for refusal had been formulated after fully considering all of the objections made. If the applicant appealed against any refusal, the Officers would have to defend the reasons and be able to provide evidence to justify the refusal. Costs could be awarded against the Council if this could not be done. The Senior Legal Adviser agreed and advised Members that, were the application to be refused and the applicant to appeal, the Inspector would not be limited to considering the matters contained within the reasons for refusal.

Councillor Martin Veal opened the debate. He referred to an independent professional evaluation of Stowey Quarry that had been undertaken on behalf of objectors and to local knowledge which he considered to be evidence for refusing permission. He felt that the Environment Agency’s objections needed to be supported by local knowledge of the situation. In view of the possibility of an appeal being lodged against a refusal, he moved that the proposal be refused as per the Consultant’s recommendation but with the following issues being included, namely: the ruling out of Stowey Quarry in the West of England Joint Waste Core Strategy; Bristol Water Authority’s objections on public health grounds; the historical evidence of land slippage linked to water courses and spring lines and ground water protection; the HGV consent never implemented that remained questionable and not proven on noise and congestion grounds alone; the notoriously high levels of noise from a landfill site which would destroy the amenity of residents and neighbouring properties; there was no acceptable asbestos dust control measures as any asbestos dust release was lethal; the 10 metre escalation in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.

The Committee considered a report which provided performance information across a range of activities within the Development Management function for the period April to June 2012.

The report was noted and the Chair on behalf of the Committee extended his thanks to Officers for their hard work in achieving this performance.

The Development Control Committee is asked to confirm the Tree Preservation Order entitled Bath and North East Somerset Council (1 Devonshire Place, Bath No. 271) Tree Preservation Order 2012 without modification.

The Committee considered the report of the Senior Arboricultural Officer which 1) informed that an objection had been received following the making of a Tree Preservation Order at 1 Devonshire Place, Bath, which was provisionally made on 3^rd April 2012 to protect a Sycamore and Lawson Cypress which make a significant contribution to the landscape and amenity of the Conservation Area; and 2) recommended after considering the objection that the Order be confirmed without modification.

The public speaker made his statement in support of the Order being confirmed (see Speakers List in Appendix 2).

It was moved by Councillor Eleanor Jackson and seconded by Councillor Les Kew and unanimously RESOLVED to confirm the Tree Preservation Order entitled “Bath and North East Somerset Council (1 Devonshire Place, Bath No 271) Tree Preservation Order 2012” without modification.

The Committee noted the report

The appropriate Officer(s) will make an oral report to update Members on progress

The Development Manager reported that statements of case had been submitted and that proofs of evidence would be formulated for the Inquiry in January 2013.

The Committee noted.