Agenda and minutes

The Chairman will ask the Committee Administrator to draw attention to the emergency evacuation procedure.

The Democratic Services Officer read out the emergency evacuation procedure.

A Vice Chairman was not required on this occasion.

Apologies for absence were received from:

Cllr Jasper Becker – substitute Cllr Martin Veal

Cllr Matthew Davies – substitute Cllr Brian Simmons

Cllr Caroline Roberts – substitute Cllr Ian Gilchrist

Cllr David Veale

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

There was no urgent business.

The Committee noted that it was the last meeting that Mark Reynolds (Group Manager, Development Management) would be attending as he was leaving the Council.  Members thanked him for all his work and wished him well for the future.

The Democratic Services Officer informed the meeting that there were a number of people wishing to make statements on planning applications and that they would be able to do so when these items were discussed.

There were no items from Councillors or Co-Opted Members.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2018.

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2018 were confirmed and signed as a correct record.

The Committee considered:

·  A report by the Group Manager (Development Management) on various planning applications.

·  An update report by the Group Manager (Development Management) on items 1 and 2 attached as Appendix 1 to these minutes.

·  Oral statements by members of the public and representatives.  A copy of the speakers’ list is attached as Appendix 2 to these minutes.

RESOLVED that in accordance with the delegated powers, the applications be determined as set out in the decisions list attached as Appendix 3 to these minutes.

Item No. 1

Application No. 18/02911/FUL

Site Location: 1 Ivy Court Cottage, Tennis Court Road, Paulton, BS39 7LU – Erection of two 3 bed dwellings with associated garages

The Case Officer reported on the application and her recommendation to permit.  She reported that an update had been received from the solicitor acting for the neighbours and there was now no dispute regarding the ownership of the boundary wall. 

A statement from local ward members Cllrs John Bull and Liz Hardman was read out at the meeting.

Cllr Crossley noted that this was an infill site with good access.  He also welcomed the building of smaller houses on the site and moved the officer recommendation to permit.

Cllr Kew seconded the motion stating that the proposal was a good use of this land.

In response to a question from Cllr Jackson the Case Officer confirmed that there was adequate space for two houses on the plot and that the dwellings would be taller than the existing garage.  She also confirmed that the issues raised by Paulton Parish Council had now been successfully addressed.

The motion was put to the vote and it was RESOLVED unanimously to PERMIT the application subject to the conditions set out in the report.

Item No. 2

Application No. 18/03674/FUL

Site Location: Lake View, Stoke Hill, Chew Stoke – Change of use from existing garage with office above into holiday let accommodation

This application was WITHDRAWN from the agenda.

Item Nos 3 and 4

Application Nos 18/04158/LBA and 18/04157/FUL

Site Location: The Priory, Old School Hill, South Stoke, Bath – Exterior alterations to include rebuild and partly relocate and extend dry and mortared rubble bath stone wall.  Erection of low rubble stone retaining wall in south east corner.  Installation of gates, erection of a wooden fence.  Installation of limestone path and garden seat platform and forming of bin/log store (Retrospective).  Change of use from pub garden to private garden including the addition of a fence and wall and erection of a shed. (Retrospective)

The Case Officer reported on the application and her recommendation to refuse. 

A representative from the Parish Council and the applicant spoke in favour of the application.

Cllr Neil Butters, local ward member, spoke in favour of the application.  He pointed out that the local community had worked hard to bring the Packhorse Pub back into use and that the kitchen extension to the pub included timber cladding.  There had been no objections to the development from local people.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

The Committee considered an application to divert sections of Public Footpaths (FP) BA5/35, BA5/46 and BA5/45 at Bath Racecourse in the Parish of Charlcombe.  The intention was to divert the footpaths away from the Racetrack and provide routes which do not cross the Racetrack surface.

The Case Officer reported on the application and her recommendation to grant authorisation.

A representative from Charlcombe Parish Council spoke in favour of the application and a local Farm Manager spoke against.

Cllr Veal, local ward member, spoke against the application.  He stated that if footpath 4(c) was created then this would have an adverse effect on walkers, dogs and livestock.  Sheep worrying was an issue in this area and chemicals were sometimes used on crops in the adjoining field which could be hazardous to walkers and their dogs. 

The Team Manager, Planning and Enforcement advised that it was not possible to amend the proposals which had been submitted as this was the scheme that had been consulted on.  The Committee could either agree the application in its entirety or reject it.

The Case Officer confirmed that there was already a right of way in the field and that if possible discussions could take place with the applicant and landowner regarding the provision of fencing in this area.  It was noted that the Cotswold Way already looped around the field.  It was also confirmed that to officers’ knowledge there had been no injuries caused to any members of the public walking across the racecourse. 

Cllr Kew acknowledged the concerns expressed but felt that the proposals were well thought through.  He then moved the officer recommendation to grant authorisation.  This was seconded by Cllr Organ.

Cllr Crossley felt that there was no problem with extinguishing the paths as set out in the report.  He pointed out that if footpath 4(c) were not created then this would meet the need of the adjoining landowner and the racecourse.  He asked whether officers could renegotiate with the racecourse to amend the plans accordingly.  This would then meet the needs of the farmer, the racecourse and walkers.

The Legal Advisor stated that any substantial changes to the scheme could cause an issue in terms of a lack of consultation because the public had been consulted about this particular scheme.

Cllr Kew agreed that if footpath 4(c) was not required then this would remove the concerns.

Cllr Veal agreed with the suggestion but noted that the Committee was required to consider the application before it.

The Case Officer explained that by removing footpath 4(c) the required tests may not be met. 

The motion was put to the vote and there were 3 votes in favour, 5 votes against and 1 abstention.  The motion was therefore LOST.

Cllr Veal then moved that consideration of the application be deferred pending a site visit.  Cllr Appleyard seconded the motion.

The motion was then put to the vote and it was RESOLVED by 6 votes in favour, 1 vote against and 2 abstentions to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

The Committee is asked to note the report.

The Committee considered the appeals report.  It was noted that the successful appeal relating to 108 Ivy Avenue related to the definition of “vertical sandwiching” of HMO properties.  Officers would review the policies as necessary in the light of this finding.

Cllr Jackson congratulated the officers on their excellent record of winning enforcement appeals.

RESOLVED to NOTEthe report.