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 required

There was none

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 Martin Veal declared an interest in the planning application at Beechen Cliff School (Item 5, Report 10) as his son was a pupil there. However, he did not consider that this would influence his judgement and he would therefore speak and vote on the application. Councillor Les Kew declared an interest in the application at the Old Coal Yard, Marsh Lane, Clutton (Item 6, Report 10) as he owned land in the area and, as he felt that this could be considered to be prejudicial, he would leave the meeting for its consideration. Councillor Bryan Organ declared an interest in Report 11 Tree Preservation Order at 35 West Hill Gardens, Radstock, as he knew the owner and therefore he would leave the meeting for its consideration. Regarding the former Bath Press site (Item 1, Report 10), Councillor Eleanor Jackson stated that she was a member of the Co-operative Party and clarified that this was not connected to the Co-operative Society which ran the store in Moorland Road. She was also a shareholder in the Radstock Co-operative Society; however, the store in Moorland Road was in a different federation.

There were no items of urgent business

The Senior Democratic Services Officer informed the meeting that were various members of the public etc wishing to make statements on planning applications and that they would be able to do so when reaching their respective items in Report 10. He pointed out that the Chair had extended the time for statements on the Former Bath Press site in view of this being a large development which had created a lot of public interest with a number of speakers.

There was none

To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 12^th December 2012

The Minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 12^th December 2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair subject to the following:

Minute 99 6^th line Delete “neighbour” and insert “architect”

Minute 106 Items 4&5, 3^rd paragraph, 2^nd line After “…neighbours”, insert “on the other side of the road …”

The Senior Professional – Major Developments to provide an oral update

The Development Manager updated Members as follows:

·  Former Cadbury’s site, Somerdale, Keynsham – Archaeological investigations now completed and report by Taylor Wimpey’s Archaeologist would be presented to English Heritage for a decision on Ancient Monument Scheduling. It was anticipated that it would not impact materially on the developable area or housing numbers. Discussions were being held with the Environment Agency regarding floodplain and riverbank issues.

·  Bath Western Riverside – The Reserved Matters applications for the next 2 stages were currently being registered.

·  Bath Spa Station Vaults – The problem with water ingress was being addressed so that remaining users could begin fit-out works. The Highways Development Control Team Leader stated that the temporary barriers in Brunel square would be removed shortly.

·  Former Railway Land, Radstock – Pre-application discussions had commenced for a reworked project to be submitted to the Council with Linden Homes on board. A timetable for the project would be submitted to a future Committee meeting.

·  Rail Electrification – No details likely to be available until March. An update would be made at a future meeting.

The Committee considered

·  The report of the Development Manager on various applications for planning permission etc

·  An Update Report by the Development Manager on Item Nos. 2 – 4, a copy of which is attached as Appendix 1 to these Minutes

·  Oral statements by members of the public etc on Item Nos. 1 – 6, the Speakers List being attached as Appendix 2 to these Minutes

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

Item 1 Former Bath Press site, Lower Bristol Road, Bath – Mixed use redevelopment comprising 6,300sq m of retail (Class A1), 4,580sq m of creative work space (Class B1), 2,610sq m of offices (Class B1), 220sq m of community space (Class D1/D2), 10 residential houses, basement car park, landscape and access (including realignment of Brook Road)(Ref 12/01999/EFUL) – The Case Officer updated Members on this proposal including late representations from Crest Nicholson regarding the gas holders; and further representations from the applicant regarding the retail issues. She advised that there was no change to her recommendation as a result of these representations. A correction was made to the 3^rd line of the 2^nd reason for refusal of the Recommendation to Refuse permission, namely, that “in out data” should read “input data”. She gave a power point presentation on the scheme to the Committee.

The public speakers made their statements against and in support of the proposal. The Chair stated that the Ward Councillor June Player, if able to attend, would have objected to the scheme in its present form as would the other Ward Councillor Sharon Ball.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson opened the debate. She expressed doubt regarding benefits to the economy from this scheme and felt for a number of reasons that this was not the right site for this scheme. Traffic issues had not been properly addressed and, importantly, the proposal would have a significant impact on the nearby Moorland Road shopping centre. She therefore moved the Officer recommendation to refuse permission which was seconded by Councillor Martin Veal.

Members debated the motion. It was considered that the reasons for refusal were substantial with the Health and Safety Executive advising that there was a potential danger to human life by virtue of proximity to the gas holders. Traffic problems were still anticipated, the requirements of the sequential test had not been met and there would be an adverse impact on the Moorland Road District Shopping Centre. A number of Members indicated that they supported the motion. Councillor Martin Veal considered that the report was detailed and balanced but the lack of more detailed highway plans in the Officer presentation was an oversight. The highway implications of the scheme were a major issue particularly because the Council had its own highway improvement scheme and the implications of both schemes needed to be made clear for Members.

At the suggestion of the Chair, the Senior Transport Planner  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

To consider a report by the Senior Arboricultural Officer recommending that the Order be confirmed without modification

Referring to the Minutes of the Committee meeting held on 24^th October 2012, the Senior Arboricultural Officer reported on this Tree Preservation Order (1) informing that it had been provisionally made on 31st October 2012 to protect a Sycamore tree which makes a contribution to the landscape and amenity of the Conservation Area; (2) stating that objections had been received from the occupiers of adjoining properties; and (3) recommending that the Order be confirmed without modification.

The Officer added that the condition of the wall had been assessed by the Council’s Building Surveyor who confirmed that it was not dangerous and that the small section affected could be rebuilt. Councillor Eleanor Jackson considered that this landmark tree was worthy of retention and therefore moved the Officer recommendation which was seconded by Councillor Liz Hardman. The motion was put to the vote.

RESOLVED to confirm the Tree Preservation Order entitled “Bath and North East Somerset Council (35 West Hill Gardens, Radstock No 29A) Tree Preservation Order 2012” without modification

Voting: 10 in favour and 0 against with 2 abstentions (Note: Councillor Bryan Organ was absent from the meeting for this Item in view of his earlier declared interest.)

To consider a report by the Senior Arboricultural Officer recommending that the Order be confirmed without modification

The Committee considered the report of the Senior Arboricultural Officer which (1) informed that this Tree Preservation Order had been provisionally made on 11^th October 2012 to protect an Ash tree which makes a contribution to the landscape and amenity of the area; (2) indicated that objections had been received from occupiers of the adjoining property; and (3) recommended that the Order be confirmed without modification.

Members discussed the matter. It was felt that the tree was worthy of retention. It was therefore moved by Councillor Eleanor Jackson and seconded by Councillor Neil Butters that the Officer recommendation be approved. The motion was put to the vote.

RESOLVED that the Tree Preservation Order entitled “Bath and North East Somerset Council (17 The Linleys, Bath No 279) Tree Preservation Order 2012” be confirmed without modification

(Voting: Unanimously in favour)

After some comments by Members, the Committee noted the report.

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

The Development Manager reported that the appeal documents were on the Council’s website and that the appellants would be applying for costs against the Council.

The Committee noted.