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

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Neil Butters, Martin Veal and David Veale and their respective substitutes were Councillors Jeremy Sparks, Vic Pritchard and Sally Davis

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

(a) the Agenda Item No and site in which they have an interest to declare; (b) the nature of their interest; and (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 Nicholas Coombes declared a non-pecuniary interest in the planning application at Paulton Engine, Hanham Lane, Paulton (Report 10) by virtue of previously having worked with the applicants. Having considered the matter, he would remain and vote on the Item. Councillor Les Kew declared an interest in the application at Clutton Industrial Estate, King Lane, Clutton (Item 5, Report 11) as he was related to one of the Directors of the applicant Company – he would therefore leave the meeting for its consideration.

There were no items of urgent business

The Senior Democratic Services Officer informed the meeting that there were members of the public wishing to make statements on the Tree Preservation Order at 29 Flatwoods Road, Claverton Down, Bath (Report 12) and on the former Fullers Earthworks, Combe Hay, Bath (Report 14) and they would be able to do so when reaching those Reports on the Agenda. There were also various people wishing to make statements on planning applications in Reports 10 and 11 and they would be able to do so when reaching those items on the Agenda.

There were no items

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 4^th July 2012

The Minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 4^th July 2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair

The Senior Professional – Major Developments to provide an oral update

The Committee noted the update report of the Senior Professional – Major Development on the progress of the archaeological survey in preparation for development at the former Cadbury site, Somerdale, Keynsham

The Committee considered

·  A report by the Development Manager on an application for planning permission at Paulton Engine, Hanham Lane, Paulton

·  Oral statements by members of the public etc, the Speakers List being attached as Appendix 1 to these Minutes

RESOLVED that, in accordance with their delegated powers, the application be determined as set out in the Decision List attached as Appendix 2 to these Minutes.

Paulton Engine, Hanham Lane, Paulton – Extension and alteration of existing 3 bed house to provide 2 further bedrooms and dining room and demolition of 1960s single storey bathroom extension; reconstruction of roofless outbuilding to provide garage, workshop and studio over; erection of a pair of semi-detached 2 bed holiday cottages; repair of derelict pigsties to provide potting sheds with bat loft; rebuilding of derelict stable; roofing and repair of 2 walls as open woodshed; lean-to greenhouse to replace kennels; rubbish clearance within site and landscape improvements – The Case Officer reported on this application and his recommendation to refuse permission. He referred to late representations received from residents of Hanham Lane. There was also further information submitted by the applicant relating to the bats on the site as a result of which Officers were now satisfied that Natural England were likely to grant a bat licence. Accordingly, the recommended Refusal Reason 6 could be deleted. An archaeological report had also been submitted which included works of mitigation and therefore Refusal Reason 5 could be deleted. The applicants had also submitted further financial details in support of their claim that the holiday cottages were required in order to make the restoration of the historic site viable. However, the Case Officer advised Members that no detailed breakdown of costs had been provided and there was no reliable evidence to suggest a financial need for the holiday cottages.

The public speakers made their statements against and in favour of the proposals. The Ward Councillor John Bull then made a statement supporting the scheme in principle but with reservations.

The matter was opened up for debate. Councillor Liz Hardman supported the proposals in principle as they would restore a derelict site, preserve industrial heritage and enhance the area. However, she could not see the justification for the holiday cottages which were outside of the development boundary.

Councillor Nicholas Coombes referred to his interest in the application declared earlier in the meeting. He stated that, due to his previous work with the applicants, he was not open-minded because he considered that the applicants had good credentials for undertaking this type of scheme and would do it very well. At this point, the Chair expressed some concern that Councillor Coombes might have given the impression that he had pre-determined the application and asked the Senior legal Adviser to advise. The Senior Legal Adviser advised that, in view of his statement that he did not have an open mind, it was advisable for Councillor Coombes to leave the meeting for the consideration of this Item because there was a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

The Committee considered

·  A report by the Development Manager on various applications for planning permission etc

·  Oral statements by members of the public etc on Item Nos. 4 and 6-9, the Speakers List being attached as Appendix 1 to these Minutes

·  An Update Report by the Development Manager on Item Nos. 1,4, 5 and 7, which is attached as Appendix 3 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 4 to these Minutes.

Items 1-3 Nos. 14 – 16 Monmouth Place, Upper Bristol Road, Bath – (1) Erection of 7 three storey plus basement 3 bed houses following demolition of existing vacant shop units (Ref 12/01730/FUL); (2) demolition of existing vacant shop units (Ref 12/01731/CA); and (3) erection of 7 three storey plus basement 3 bed houses following demolition of existing vacant shop units (Ref 12/01741/LBA) – The Case Officers reported on these applications for planning permission, conservation area consent and listed building consent and their recommendations (1) to (A) authorise the Planning and Environmental Law Manager to enter into a S106 Agreement to cover (i) £6,000 for the improvement of local public transport infrastructure; (ii) £28,430.13 for education provision in accordance with the advice of the Education Officer; (iii) works to upgrade the paving in front of the site to match the adjoining pavements to a specification agreed in writing with the local planning authority in consultation with the Highway Authority; and (iv) a contribution £17,360.50 toward off-site open space provision/improvement; and (B) subject to the prior completion of the above Agreement, authorise the Divisional Director of Planning and Transport Development to Permit subject to conditions; (2) grant conservation area consent subject to conditions; and (3) grant listed building consent subject to conditions.

Councillor Les Kew considered that that this was a good proposal which gave consideration to light issues for the existing buildings situated at the rear of the site. He therefore moved the Officer’s’ recommendation for the planning application which was seconded by Councillor Doug Nicol.

Councillor Nicholas Coombes declared a non-pecuniary interest as he had worked with the applicants. He would remain and vote on the application.

Members debated the motion. The proposals were supported as they improved the street scene and provided much needed housing. It was noted that there would be loss of views for some flats at the rear of the site and some loss of light due to the height of the proposed development.

The Chair summed up the debate and put the matter to the vote. Voting: unanimously in favour.

Councillor Les Kew moved the applications for conservation area consent and listed building consent as per the Officers’ recommendations. These were seconded by Councillor Doug Nicol. The motions were voted on separately and approved unanimously.

Item 4 Land rear of 79 London Road West, Bailbrook Lane, Bath – Erection of 4 detached dwellings – The Team Leader – Development Management reported on this application  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

To consider a report by the Senior Arboricultural Officer recommending that this new Tree Preservation Order to protect a group of 14 trees be confirmed without modification

Referring to the Minutes of the meeting held on 18^th January 2012, the Senior Arboricultural Officer submitted a report on a new Tree Preservation Order at 29 Flatwoods Road which (1) informed of an objection to the inclusion of one tree within this group of beech; and (2) recommended that the Order be confirmed without modification.

The Senior Arboricultural Officer reported on the matter by means of a power point presentation. The owners of the property nearest the tree made their statements against the inclusion of the tree in the Order. The Officer responded to Members’ queries.

Members debated the matter. Councillor Eleanor Jackson considered this to be a beautiful row of trees and felt that, as long the tree was not hollow or diseased, it should be fairly healthy. She therefore moved the Officer recommendation which was seconded by Councillor David Martin.

Members debated the motion. Various issues were discussed. There were some concerns regarding the roots affecting drains and foundations. However, some Members considered that the tree added to the appearance of the row of trees and also the owners could seek consent for any work to the tree that may be required in the future. The Chair summed up the debate and put the motion to the vote.

RESOLVED to confirm without modification the Tree Preservation Order entitled “Bath and North East Somerset Council (29 Flatwoods Road, Claverton Down, Bath No 267A) Tree Preservation Order 2012”

(Voting: 7 in favour and 5 against)

To note the report

To consider a joint report by the Divisional Director of Planning and Transport Development and the Planning and Environmental Law Manager

Referring to the Minutes of the meeting held on 9^th May 2012, the Committee considered the joint report of the Divisional Director of Planning and Transport Development and the Planning and Environmental Law Manager which (i) informed Members of appeals lodged against the Enforcement Notices that had been served on 30^th May and which Notices were therefore now held in abeyance; (ii) attached a Timetable provided by the owner’s Agents for progression of an application for a Residual Waste Facility (RWF) on the site through to its implementation; (iii) stated that the owners had asked whether the Council would make a joint application to the Planning Inspectorate for the appeals to be held in abeyance pending the Council’s consideration of the application for a RWF in accordance with the Timetable; (iv) set out the Officers’ comments on the request; and (v) recommended that, in the circumstances, the Committee agree to making such a joint application to the Planning Inspectorate with the Council reserving the right to reinstate the appeals if there was any failure on the owner’s part to comply with the Timetable for implementation of a RWF or the outline planning application was refused.

The Planning and Environmental Law Manager reported on the issues in the Report stating that, if the Timetable set out in Annex A of the Report was adhered to, the unauthorised development on the site would be resolved sooner than if the appeals were to go ahead. The Council would have a RWF on the land fulfilling the Council’s allocation in the Joint Waste Core Strategy (JWCS). She referred to representations received from the owner’s Agents, a local resident and from Harrison Grant, Solicitors acting on behalf of Protect Bath. The public speakers made their statements on the matter.

Councillor Bryan Organ considered that there should be no further delays in taking action and therefore moved that the request for the appeals to be held in abeyance be refused. There followed some questions and discussion by Members after which Councillor Nicholas Coombes seconded the motion.

Members debated the motion. There were differing views as to whether to agree to the request to hold the enforcement appeals in abeyance. Reference was made to the site being allocated for a RWF in accordance with the JWCS and concerns were expressed that there was no guarantee that permission would be granted. It was queried why the appeals and the application for a RWF could not be progressed at the same time ie in tandem. However, this was not on offer. The Divisional Director emphasised that the enforcement action was not being revisited and that the appeals would only be held in abeyance pending the Council’s determination of the planning application.  The recommended action was an opportunity to deliver a RWF on the site, which is the Council’s policy, and to achieve compliance with planning issues earlier than originally anticipated.

Some Members felt that the enforcement appeals should not be held in abeyance and that there should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.