Agenda and minutes

The Democratic Services Officer will draw attention to the emergency evacuation procedure.

The Democratic Services Officer read out the emergency evacuation procedure.

Apologies for absence were submitted by Cllr Hal MacFie, Cllr Fiona Gourley was in attendance as his substitute.

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 4.4 Appendix 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.

In relation to application 22/04720/FUL - The University Of Bath, Eastern Sports Field, Sports Training Village, University Of Bath Campus, Claverton Down, Bath:

Cllr Tim Warren declared in the interest of transparency, that he had attended a dinner hosted by the University of Bath in 2019 during his time as leader of Council and that having sought legal advice he was able to confirm that this would not prejudice him in considering this item and that he had not prejudged the application.

Cllr Fiona Gourley declared in the interest of transparency, that she had worked at the University of Bath for 3 years 10 years ago and that having sought legal advice she was able to confirm that this would not prejudice her in considering this item and that she had not prejudged the application.

Cllr Duncan Hounsell stated that a number of Members may have had contact with the University but that they fulfilled their legal obligation to consider applications with an open mind. 

There was no urgent business.

To note that, regarding planning applications to be considered, members of the public who have given the requisite notice to Democratic Services will be able to make a statement to the Committee immediately before their respective applications are considered. There will be a time limit of 3 minutes for each proposal, i.e., 3 minutes for the Parish and Town Councils, 3 minutes for the objectors to the proposal and 3 minutes for the applicant, agent and supporters. This allows a maximum of 9 minutes per proposal.

The Democratic Services Officer informed the meeting of the procedure for making statements on planning applications and that this would be at the time when these items were discussed.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 7 June 2023 as a correct record for signing by the Chair.

The minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 7 June 2023 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

There are no site visit applications for consideration.

There were no site visit applications for consideration.

The following items will be considered at 11am:

1.  22/04431/FUL - Lower Bristol Road, Westmoreland, Bath

2.  22/04720/FUL - The University Of Bath, Eastern Sports Field, Sports Training Village, University Of Bath Campus, Claverton Down, Bath

The following items will be considered at 2pm:

1.  23/00895/FUL – Waterworks Cottage, Charlcombe Way, Fairfield Park, Bath

2.  23/01067/VAR - Land Between Three Gables And Paysons Croft, Church Lane, Bishop Sutton

The Committee considered:

A report and update report by the Head of Planning on various planning applications under the main applications list.

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

RESOLVEDthat in accordance with the delegated powers, the applications be determined as set out in the Main decisions list attached as Appendix 2 to these minutes.

(1)  22/04431/FUL - Lower Bristol Road, Westmoreland, Bath

The Case Officer introduced her report which considered an application for the redevelopment of the former laundry services site to provide a three-storey building plus inset mansard roof comprising self-storage units

with ancillary Business Centre Facility, signage and associated works. 

She gave a verbal update in relation to the documents submitted by the applicant with a view to negating the need for pre-commencement conditions:

1.  The Wildlife Protection and Enhancement Scheme was considered acceptable by the Council’s Ecologist and so the relevant condition could be revised to compliance.

2.  The Council’s Arboricultural Officer was reviewing the Tree Protection Plan and Arboricultural Method Statement and as the officer recommendation was delegated to permit, this could be revised once it had been reviewed. 

She also reported that a Gull Management Plan had been submitted and reviewed by the Council Officer who considered it to be satisfactory although suggested that further improvements could be made.  It was the Case Officer’s view that it would not be reasonable to suggest further amendments and recommended revising the pre-commencement condition to compliance.

She confirmed her recommendation that officers be delegated to permit the application subject to:

1.  the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure:

a.  A refundable Travel Plan Bond of £77, 443 and non-refundable monitoring fee of £4,775.

b.  A financial contribution of £6,545 towards Targeted Training and Recruitment

2.  the conditions set out in the report and additional conditions/amended conditions in the update report and verbal report. 

The following public representations were received:

1.  Mike Lamplough supporting the application.

2.  Alex Sherman, Bath Preservation Trust, objecting to the application.

In response to Members’ questions, it was confirmed:

1.  In terms of materials, Bath stone ashlar was proposed on the front and a metal cladding on the side with no windows to avoid overlooking.  There was a proposed condition to ensure a sample of the materials would be submitted and approved in advance.  The applicant had worked with the Council to amend the design in balance with the use of building. 

2.  In relation to the site being a flood risk due to its proximity to the river, the applicant had submitted a sequential test which was passed by appropriate authorities. 

3.  The adjacent St Peters Place was a non-designated heritage asset.

4.  The proposed storage could benefit small businesses, but it was not restricted to business use and could also be used for residential storage. 

5.  In terms of light shadowing, a study had been carried out and there was some difference  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

The Committee is asked to note the report.

In relation to the questions the Team Manager (Development Manager) confirmed:

1.  22/00722/AR – Garfunkels, Orange Grove, City Centre the appeal was allowed/dismissed in part and there were no costs awarded against the Council.

2.  Enforcement investigations were confidential and so these details were not available on the website.

3.  Officers would look into including hyperlinks in the report to link to more details about the appeal cases.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.