Agenda item

The Committee considered

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

·  Oral statements by members of the public etc on Items Nos 1-4, the Speakers List being attached as Appendix 1 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 2 to these Minutes

Item 1 Weston All Saints Primary School, Broadmoor Lane, Weston, Bath – Provision of a new 6 classroom teaching block and associated external works (Resubmission) – The Case Officer reported and updated the Committee on this application and his recommendation to grant permission with conditions.

The public speakers made their statements against and in favour of the proposal.

Councillors Colin Barrett (Ward Member) and Geoff Ward (Bathavon North) made statements on the application.

Members asked questions about the proposal to which the Officer responded.

Councillor Bryan Organ pointed out that there were usually issues with traffic and schools due to parents using their cars to drop off and collect their children from school. However, regarding this proposal, there were highway and traffic management measures that would mitigate the effect and therefore he moved the Officer recommendation to grant permission with conditions. The motion was seconded by Councillor Liz Hardman.

Members debated the motion. Councillor Manda Rigby considered that a condition should be added to ensure that all outstanding matters be resolved before the buildings are occupied to which the mover and seconder agreed. The Team Manager – Development Management stated that it was not considered necessary to attach a condition to this application requiring a Travel Plan and that it was the applicants’ responsibility to satisfy the recommended conditions. However, Councillor Manda Rigby considered that a condition requiring the submission of a Travel Plan should be added if permission was granted.

Councillor Malcolm Lees (Ward Member) referred to a number of issues with which he was concerned. These included the safety of the pupils, the Highways Officer objection, that the need for the expansion had not been identified, a Travel Plan not being submitted in time on a previous application, a number of “near miss” incidents that had not been recorded, problems with “Park and Stride”.

The Chair summed up the situation and voiced his support. Councillor Malcolm Lees suggested that the Site Visit had been “stage managed” to give a better impression of the situation on the ground.

The Chair put the matter to the vote. Voting: 8 in favour and 4 against. Motion carried.

Item 2 Court Farm, The Street, Compton Martin – Retention of existing building for use as ancillary accommodation (extension) to Court Farmhouse and retention of access track and alterations to car parking to serve adjacent holiday lets (Part retrospective) – The Case Officer reported on this application and her recommendation to grant permission with conditions.

The public speakers made their statements.

Councillor Vic Pritchard as Ward Member on the Committee opened the debate. He referred to previous issues on the site not being compliant with planning regulations and to a commercial element being retained. The car park was practically redundant and a landscape condition was required.

After some discussion, Councillor Ian Gilchrist moved the Officer recommendation which was seconded by Councillor Neil Butters. Councillor Liz Hardman considered that the application would regularise the situation but felt that the landscaping condition should be more specific. The Case Officer responded that this could be achieved with removal of some of the tarmac car park and hedging. The Team Manager – Development Management confirmed that the standard condition with additional wording added to require the removal of part of the car park would cover the situation. The mover and seconder agreed that this be included in the motion. There was further discussion about the tarmac car park and it was considered that about half needed to be removed as indicated by the Case Officer on the site plan. Councillor Vic Pritchard felt that this was not enough and that there was further parking available on the site. He considered that the access was excessive.

The Chair summed up the debate and put the motion to the vote. Voting: 6 in favour and 1 against with 5 abstentions. Motion carried.

Item 3 WT Burden Ltd, Bath Road, Farmborough – Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site with up to 14 dwellings with associated means of access, access roads, car parking, boundary treatments and landscaping (including recladding) of retained building to private office/workshop accommodation (Class B1) with associated car parking – The Case Officer reported on this application and her recommendation to refuse permission.

The public speakers made their statements against and in favour of the proposal.

The Ward Councillor Sally Davis made a statement in support of the application.

The Team Manager – Development Management informed the meeting that a 5 year land supply had been identified in the Core Strategy but the NPPF still needed to be considered regarding the effect on the openness of the Green Belt which would be adversely affected by the development. A line of trees had been felled but, even if they had not been, the openness would still be affected.

Members discussed the issues of this proposal. It was considered that there were various benefits from the site being developed for residential use. It was within walking distance of the site, affordable housing was included in the proposal and houses would be better than some other commercial or possibly industrial use, Councillor Vic Pritchard agreed and the proposal would tidy up an unsightly site. On this basis and despite it being located in the Green Belt, he moved that the recommendation be overturned and that permission be delegated to Officers for appropriate conditions including landscaping to screen the development. The motion was seconded by Councillor Liz Hardman.

Members debated the motion. It was considered that the fall back position of industrial use would have a greater impact on the Green Belt. The motion was put to the vote and was carried, 10 voting in favour and 1 against with 1 abstention.

However, the Team Manager – Development Management exercised his delegated power under Paragraph 7 of the Committee’s Protocol when decisions were contrary to Policy and Officer advice. This rendered the decision of no effect until the application is reconsidered by the Committee at a subsequent meeting when it can make such decision as it sees fit.

Item 4 The Old Rectory, Anchor Lane, Combe Hay – Erection of garage with staff accommodation and extension of the curtilage of the Old Rectory (Resubmission) – The Case Officer reported on this application and her recommendation to refuse permission. She updated Members on the applicant’s offer of improvements to the public footpath.

The Clerk to Combe Hay Parish Council made a statement on the application which was followed by a statement by the applicant in support of his application.

Councillor Patrick Anketell-Jones opened the debate. He referred to the fact that the proposal was in the Green Belt and outside the housing development boundary. He felt that there could be some suburbanisation being close to Bath and the integrity of the village could be eroded. Councillor Bryan Organ considered that the extension of residential use into the Green Belt was wrong and therefore moved the Officer recommendation to refuse permission which was seconded by Councillor Doug Nicol.

Members debated the motion. It was supported by some Members even though the site was in the Green Belt and located outside the housing development boundary. Other Members considered that for various reasons they could not support the motion.

The motion was put to the vote and was lost, 4 Members voting in favour and 8 against.

Councillor Vic Pritchard therefore moved that Officers be delegated to grant permission subject to appropriate conditions which was duly seconded. This was on the basis of earlier discussion by Members, namely, that development would complement The Old Rectory which was a prestigious property and would enable staff to be located on the premises to maintain the property, there were no existing garage facilities for the property and there would be a planning gain by removal of an unsightly old wall. The Ward Member on the Committee, Councillor David Veale, stated that, on balance, he supported the application. The Team Manager – Development Management stated that, if permission were to be granted, a S106 Agreement may need to be included to ensure that the accommodation was ancillary to the main house which was accepted by Members.

On this basis, the motion was put to the vote and was carried, 9 voting in favour and 3 against.

(Note: After this decision at 4.20pm, the Committee adjourned for a 5 minute comfort break.)