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.

There were no apologies for absence.

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.

Cllr Sue Craig declared a non-pecuniary interest in application no. 19/04486/FUL, 9 Partis Way, Lower Weston, Bath as she was a friend of one of the people speaking against this application.  She had not discussed the planning application with the speaker.

Cllr Brian Simmons declared a non-pecuniary interest in application no. 19/04598/FUL, Amenity Green, Glebe Walk, Keynsham.  Cllr Simmons had spoken to residents both for and against this application and stated that he would abstain from speaking or voting.

There was no urgent business.

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.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 15 January 2020.

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 January 2020 were confirmed and signed as a correct record subject to the following amendment:

Item No. 1, Application No. 19/04462/FUL – at the end of the first bullet point add the following words:

“and therefore would not be the sole reason for refusal”

The Committee considered:

·  A report by the Head of Planning on various planning applications.

·  Oral statements by members of the public and representatives.  A copy of the speakers’ list is attached as Appendix 1 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 2 to these minutes.

Item No. 1

Application No. 20/00111/TCA

Site Location: 67 Englishcombe Lane, Southdown, Bath, BA2 2EE – Leyland Cypress 13m (T1) – Fell

The Case Officer reported on the application and her recommendation to raise no objection.

Cllr Jackson moved the officer recommendation to raise no objection.  This was seconded by Cllr Rigby who pointed out that the application was only being considered by the Committee because the applicant is a member of B&NES Council.

The motion was put to the vote and it was RESOLVED unanimously to raise NO OBJECTION to the application.

Item No. 2

Application No. 19/04914/FUL

Site Location: Rosemere, Homefield Road, Saltford – Erection of a new dwelling and gate house following the demolition of existing dwelling

The Case Officer reported on the application and the recommendation to permit.

Two local residents spoke against the application.

The agent spoke in favour of the application.

Cllr Alastair Singleton, the Local Ward Member spoke against the application.  He stated that the dwelling was in an elevated position in a sensitive location.  The application was contrary to policy NE2 which required that any adverse impact on the landscape should be avoided or mitigated.  It also did not adhere to policy D6 which stated that a development must not cause significant harm.  He pointed out that properties in The Shallows would be overlooked.  He raised issues of light pollution and the adverse impact on the Conservation Area below.  He felt that the gatehouse would be out of keeping with the area and would be a self-contained residence rather than an annexe.  He felt that the application represented overdevelopment by reason of mass and scale and would also cause harm to a neighbouring heritage asset.  He also stated that there were local concerns that this property would be used as an Airbnb party house.

The Case Officer then responded to questions as follows:

·  The applicant has reduced the height of the proposed dwelling to address concerns raised regarding overlooking.

·  The gate house is considered to be an acceptable ancillary building in this plot and location.  The Principal Planning Officer explained that Case Law relating to annexes focussed on the manner in which the dwelling is occupied.  This should be considered on a case by case basis.

·  The Committee is not bound by previous decisions on this site, but the decisions should be given some weight.

·  Concerns regarding the removal of a cherry tree had now been resolved by the inclusion of an arboricultural report with this application.

Cllr Jackson noted that the agent felt that the reasons for refusal of the previous applications on this site have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

The Committee is asked to note the report.

The Committee considered the quarterly performance report from October to December 2019.

Cllr Hounsell requested that, in future, the performance report should include the reason why enforcement investigations had been closed.

RESOLVED: To NOTE the report.

The Committee is asked to note the report.

The Committee considered the appeals report.

RESOLVED to NOTEthe report.