Meeting documents

Document P

NOTE OF INTERVIEW

13 SEPTEMBER 2006

INTERVIEW WITH COUNCILLOR PHYLLIS GAY

Councillor Gay first indicated on a diagram the position of her house in relation to the proposed development. There is a road and a number of gardens between Councillor Gay's house and the gardens in which the development was proposed. Councillor Gay confirmed that she would probably be able to see the area of the development from a bedroom window in her top floor, but did not believe she would be adversely affected in any way by the development. The road in which the entrance to the development would be situated is a busy road on which there is a number of flats. She did not anticipate that the addition of five houses would significantly affect the traffic on that road. In any event, the entrance to the new development would be on Manor Park Road and Councillor Gay lives on Manor Road itself. Councillor Gay emphasised that if she had been sufficiently close to the development to be affected by it, she would have been notified about the planning application under the neighbour consultation procedure. She has received no such notification of the development.

Councillor Gay said that when attending the development control committee she would normally have looked at the papers in advance and would have highlighted very clearly any matters in which she believed she had an interest. This would remind her to declare an interest at the appropriate time. She had not highlighted this application prior to going into planning committee because she did not believe she had an interest in this matter. She is not related to nor is a close personal friend of either the owner or the developer. She owns no property immediately adjacent to the property and there will be no financial impact on her arising from this development. She did not believe that her house was in sufficient proximity to the development to be affected by it.

Councillor Gay explained that both she and Councillor Jonathan Gay jointly represent the Radstock area. As such, both she and Councillor Jonathan Gay received objections from residents in the local area about this planning application. As Councillor Gay is a member of the Development Control Committee herself, she did not inform any of the objectors whether or not she was in support of the application or otherwise. She noted the issues raised and advised the objectors to put their complaints formally to the officers collating information about the planning application. She would then have considered the objections raised as part of the evidence and issues considered in relation to the planning application. However, ultimately the planning committee has to make its decision in accordance with the planning regulations. As a member of the committee, Councillor Phyllis Gay stated that she knew she could not voice her opposition to the application at the meetings and she would not have voiced any such opposition. Accordingly she had discussed with Councillor Jonathan Gay that he should be there to voice the opposition of the constituents in their area to the application. Councillor Phyllis Gay stated that she would have taken into account the objections raised to the application when considering whether to grant the application along with the rest of the committee.

At the start of the first meeting on 5^th April 2006 Councillor Gay had become involved in an issue regarding a member of the public who had wished to speak to a CD and she had to involve the Chair of the committee to clarify that this would not be allowed. Accordingly the meeting had effectively started before she turned her full attention to the matter of whether or not she had an interest. However, she had not previously considered, nor does she now believe that she has an interest in this matter. Any interest she has in the application was the fact that she lives in the same village. If she needed to declare an interest in all applications concerning the village, Councillor Gay stated that she would have interest in a significant number of planning applications at Radstock. At the first meeting Councillor Gay had to leave after this application was discussed as she had a civic function to attend.

Councillor Gay confirmed that Councillor Jonathan Gay did attend the first meeting of the development committee. She is not sure whether he attended the final meeting. She is also unsure whether he attended the site meeting itself, but local members are invited to site meetings held in their area so he probably did attend. This is normal. The public and councillors from outwith the area who are not on the development committee are not able to attend.

At the first meeting a number of objections were heard. Both the complainant and Councillor Jonathan Gay put forward the objections they had received. No decision was made at this meeting as Councillor Phyllis Gay called a site meeting after the objections were heard. It is normal to call a site visit at this stage. If there is a lot of interest in a site there will normally be a site visit called. Four or five site visits were called for other planning matters being considered at that first meeting. Councillor Phyllis Gay had asked for a site meeting due to the interest in the site from its neighbours. Also she knew that other committee members would not have any knowledge of the site due to its location and they would want to look at the site. She knew from her own knowledge of the area that it was not easy to see from the plan exactly what was proposed plus many of the councillors on the committee would know much about that area. Unlike the centre of Bath, it is not an area that people would normally be passing through.

The committee had also approved the suggestion at that first meeting that the head of planning submit a report regarding the preservation of historical houses such as these former miners' dwellings. Councillor Gay cannot remember who put forward this proposal. Normally it would be one of the officers who would have supported this idea perhaps after hearing the evidence and the objections. Ultimately it would be the decision of the full committee to approve the request for a report but she cannot remember specifically who asked for it.

The minutes of these meetings are usually short. She would not expect to be noted who spoke and what objections they raised. She knows that Councillor Jonathan Gay was in attendance at the first meeting on Wednesday 5 April. His attendance is not noted in the minutes but she recalls that Councillor Gay arrived late to the meeting so perhaps his attendance has simply been omitted. Councillor Jonathan Gay was there to put forward the objections and the represent the constituents who had approached him.

In relation to the site inspection report, Councillor Phyllis Gay did not submit any of the objections listed. These were all third party objections which had been recorded by the officer dealing with the application.

The final meeting regarding this application was held on the 3rd May 2006. Councillor Gay confirmed that she put forward the proposal to overturn the officer recommendation to permit the application. She confirmed that she put forward this proposal on the basis of the objections submitted against this application which included the objections from her constituents recorded in the papers.

The planning committee is made up of 12 members. Councillor Gay stated that as only one of those members she would not be able to sway a decision by the full committee anyway. The officers give their recommendations to the planning committee but the planning committee does not have to go along with them. She thought this application was relatively straightforward. The most common objection received was that the large gardens are part of the heritage of the miners cottages and there was an opinion that the large gardens should be retained as part of that heritage. The people who had notified Councillor Phyllis Gay about their objections were also upset about the planning application as the development fell just outside the conservation area.

Councillor Gay explained that there is a history of political and personal differences and disputes between her, Councillor Jonathan Gay and the complainant. The complainant has raised a number of complaints about both Councillors Gay which have been heard previously by the Standards Board, none of which have been upheld. Councillor Gay believes this complaint has been brought by the complainant to cause inconvenience to both her and to Councillor Jonathan Gay and that this is borne out by the fact that the original complaint is not properly researched. The original complaint states that she did not declare an interest as any of the meetings. However it is clear from documentation available to the public that she did declare a non-prejucidial personal interest at the final Development Control Committee meeting on 3^rd May 2006.

Councillor Gay said that on account of her not having any interest in the application she was happy to proceed through the first two meetings with no declaration of interest in the application. However, Councillor Phyllis Gay was aware that the complainant had attended the first meeting in relation to this application. Due to their acrimonious history she knew that the complainant would be looking for something else to pick her up on in relation to her involvement in this application. She declared a personal and non prejudicial interest at the last meeting because this was the only meeting in which a decision would actually be taken in relation to the application. She made the declaration as a safety measure to ensure that neither the planning decision nor her actions could be challenged by the complainant. She stated that if she had had a financial or prejudicial interest in the planning application she would have left the room. However, as she only had a personal and non prejudicial interest she didn't feel that she needed to leave the room nor exclude herself from the decision making process.

I confirm that this is a correct record of the interview

Signed____________________________________ Date____________________

Councillor Phyllis Gay