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 had been received from Cllr Ian Halsall (Cllr Duncan Hounsell was in attendance as substitute) and Cllr Toby Simon (Cllr Ruth Malloy was in attendance as substitute).

In the absence of Cllr Ian Halsall, the meeting was chaired by Cllr Lucy Hodge.

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.

There were no declarations of interest. 

Cllr Lucy Hodge asked for it to be noted that she was a ward member for the first item on the agenda and had referred the application to Committee due to the wider interest so that it could be discussed in the public domain.

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 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 3 July 2024 as a correct record for signing by the Chair.

Cllr Lucy Hodge asked for an amendment to the minutes to reflect that at the end of the meeting, she had requested a site visit to an operating padel court in advance of considering future applications for padel tennis facilities.

Subject to the amendment, it was moved by Cllr Paul Crossley, seconded by Cllr Tim Warren and:

RESOLVED  that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 3 July 2024 be confirmed as a correct record for signing 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.  24/00607/FUL - Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, Lansdown, Bath

2.  21/05576/FUL - Westward, 2 The Orchard, Pensford, Bristol

3.  23/04613/LBA - 10 Berkeley Place, Walcot, Bath

The Committee considered:

A report and update report by the Head of Planning on the 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.

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

(1)  24/00607/FUL - Lansdown Lawn Tennis & Squash Racquets Club, Northfields, Lansdown, Bath

The Planning Officer introduced the report which considered an application for the replacement of an existing tennis court with two padel tennis courts and mini (juniors) tennis court, including extended terrace, replacement lighting and associated works.  She gave an update to report that a condition relating to hours of use had been omitted from the report and so the recommendation was that officers be delegated authority to permit the application subject to the conditions set out in the report and an additional condition to restrict hours of use from 9am to 9pm.  She also advised that videos had been sent to members of the Planning Committee in relation to current traffic and parking around the site and also showing two people playing a tennis match, one with a padel bat and one with a tennis racquet.  She confirmed that this had been reviewed by officers and did not change the acoustic report submitted with the application or the officers’ recommendation. 

The following public representations were received:

1.  Tessa Hampden, John Baxter, Julian Lewis, Geraldine Hudson and John Morgan objecting to the application.

2.  Tom Rocke speaking in support of the application.

Cllr Mark Elliot was unable to attend as ward member and asked for a statement to be read in his absence as summarised below:

1.  Concern that adding the padel tennis noise to the peak ambient noise would have a detrimental effect on the residential amenity of the surrounding properties.

2.  Concern about the potential additional pressure on parking in surrounding roads.

In response to Members’ questions, it was confirmed:

1.  The distance from the proposed padel court to the nearby residential properties, the distance from the edge of the padel court boundary to the property Innisfree was 3.5m and to the cottage was 8.5m.

2.  A transport plan could not be justified in relation to this application. 

3.  In relation to whether the club was looking to increase income generation, the club had not put forward a viability argument and so this was not a material planning consideration.

4.  The Lawn Tennis Association recommended that where residential properties were less than 30m from a padel court there should be noise mitigation measures.  This application complied with the advice as additional glazed screening would be provided to mitigate noise.  The screening was 3 metres in height and officers considered this to be appropriate.

5.  Officers did not recommend including a condition about noise monitoring and explained the implications of doing so and the options that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

The Committee is asked to note the report.

Members requested that additional information be included in the report in cases where an appeal has gone against the Council to outline briefly why the Planning Inspector came to a different view.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

The Committee welcomed the performance report and thanked officers.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.