Agenda item

The Committee considered:

·  The report of the Development Manager on various applications for planning permission

·  An Update Report by the Development Manager on Item Nos. 1-5, a copy of which is attached as Appendix 1 to these Minutes

·  Oral statements by members of the public etc. on Item Nos. 1, 2, 5 and 6, a copy of which is attached as Appendix 2 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 4 to these Minutes.

Items 1&2 Gammon Plant Hire, Rock Hall Lane, Combe Down, Bath – (1) Erection of 1 Mining Interpretation Centre (rated BREEAM Excellent), 8 Eco-Homes (rated Code 5 zero carbon), 1 apartment (rated Code 5 zero carbon) and all associated hard and soft landscaping following demolition of all existing properties with the exception of a portion of historic stone wall to Rock Hall Lane (Resubmission)(Ref No 11/04166/FUL); and (2) demolition of all existing properties with the exception of a portion of historic stone wall to Rock Hall Lane (Ref No 11/04167/CA) – The Historic Environment Team Leader and the Planning Officer reported on these applications and their recommendations to refuse permission/consent. Attention was drawn to the Update Report which contained further information and summarised further representations received and recommended the deletion of the 3^rd reason for refusal on application (1) above. The public speakers made their statements against and in favour of the proposals and the Ward Councillors Cherry Beath and Roger Symonds made statements supporting the proposals.

The Development Manager advised Members that the Secretary of State was due to make an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) screening direction and, therefore, if Members were minded to Permit, the matter should be delegated to Officers to Permit subject to the Secretary of State making a negative screening opinion. She also advised Members that the Secretary of State had been asked to consider “listing” the existing buildings. She advised that, whilst this did not affect Members’ decision today, if the Secretary of State should “list” the buildings before any permission/consent were implemented, then the applicant would need to obtain listed building consent as well.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson agreed with the Officers’ recommendations and moved that the applications be refused accordingly which was seconded by Councillor Liz Hardman. Members debated the motions. Most Members were supportive of the scheme as they considered that the existing buildings were not of significant architectural and historical merit to warrant their retention. The design of the new buildings with a zero carbon rating was good and would fit into the streetscape. The motions to Refuse were put to the vote. Voting: 2 in favour and 8 against with 2 abstentions. Motions lost. It was then moved by Councillor Neil Butters and seconded by Councillor David Martin to Delegate to Officers to Permit/Consent subject to the Secretary of State issuing a negative EIA screening direction, the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure financial contributions in respect of Children’s Services and appropriate conditions. The motions were put to the vote. Voting: 9 in favour and 2 against with 1 abstention. Motions carried for the following reasons: Members were of the view that the existing buildings, even if they were to be regarded as heritage assets, were not of sufficient historical value to warrant retention and their demolition would not be harmful to the Conservation Area. Members also felt that the proposed buildings were of a good design with a carbon zero rating and, in the context of a mixed area, would not be harmful to the Conservation Area or the setting of nearby “listed” buildings.

Item 3 Parcel 0006, Maynard Terrace, Clutton – Erection of 43 dwellings and associated works – This application was withdrawn at the applicants’ request.

Item 4 Land rear of Nos. 2-20 High Street, Keynsham – Erection of 3 storey building to provide 14 residential apartments and associated landscaping and car parking (including re-provision of car parking for existing High Street properties) – The Committee considered the report on this application. The Update Report contained further representations and referred to amended drawings being received which revised the application in a number of ways. The Update Report amended the Recommendation in the Main Report to: Subject to (A) no new material planning matters arising from the re-advertising of the amended plans; and (B) confirmation from the Planning and Environmental Law Manager that a satisfactory signed Unilateral Agreement has been received, authorise the Divisional Director for Planning and Transport Development to Permit subject to the conditions in the Main Report and any other appropriate conditions.

The Ward Councillor Charles Gerrish made a statement and urged Members to defer consideration of the application so that members of the public could have more time to comment on the revised plans. Members considered this issue. It was moved by Councillor Martin Veal and seconded by Councillor Bryan Organ to Defer consideration to enable further consultation on the amended scheme. The motion was put to the vote and agreed unanimously.

Item 5 Fairash Poultry Farm, Compton Martin Road, West Harptree – Erection of 7 dwellings following demolition of existing poultry farm – The Case Officer reported on this application and her recommendation to refuse permission. A further reason for refusal was recommended in relation to the increased use of a sub-standard access. The Update Report set out the Case Officer’s comments on a further representation received from the Environmental Health Officer. The applicant made a statement in favour of the application and the Ward Councillor Tim Warren made a statement supporting the proposal. He considered that a Site Visit should be held.

Councillor Dine Romero moved that consideration be deferred for a Site Visit to view the site in the context of its surroundings. This was seconded by Councillor Neil Butters. A deferral for a Site Visit was generally supported and therefore the motion was put to the vote and was carried, voting being 9 in favour and 1 against with 2 abstentions.

Item 6 No. 69 Haycombe Drive, Southdown, Bath – Erection of a detached 2 storey dwelling on land to the rear of 69 Haycombe Drive – The Case Officer reported on this application and his recommendation to Permit subject to conditions. He read out the comments of Councillor Paul Crossley, one of the Ward Members, who considered that it should be refused. The applicant’s agent made a statement in favour of the proposal.

Councillor Dine Romero considered that this was not a good site for a house because it adjoined a very busy road with fast moving traffic and would cause a hazard to traffic and pedestrian safety. She moved that permission be refused which was seconded by Councillor Martin Veal.

Members debated the motion. Some Members felt that the scheme had a number of good points but other Members considered that the highway safety issues were a serious concern with a number of reported accidents in the vicinity (as well as unreported incidents) and there was also the effect of the development on the amenities of adjoining residents to consider. The motion to refuse permission was put to the vote. Voting: 7 in favour and 5 against. Motion carried for the following reasons: The proposal would be detrimental to highway safety and would have an unacceptable impact on the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring properties in relation to the likely proximity of the dwelling to the neighbouring property.