Agenda and minutes

Councillors are reminded of the need to declare personal and prejudicial interests, including the nature and extent of such interests, in relation to business on the agenda, before any discussion takes place on the item. Councillors requiring clarification should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer prior to the day of the meeting.

Members declared the following personal interests:-

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the application for a development to provide mixed employment uses at land south of Yeoford Way, Marsh Barton Trading Estate, Exeter. This was an outline application with all matters reserved for future consideration.

The application proposed to develop the area for a mixed employment use for Use Classes B1, B2 and B8. An application for improved flood drainage of the site had been approved in October 2009.

The Head of Planning and Building Control stated that although the site was not in the Exeter Local Plan as being identified for employment use it had been identified in the emerging Exeter LDF Core Strategy as suitable to meet future employment needs.  He updated Members on the ecological, energy, transport and flooding issues with regards to the proposal. Members were advised that the wording of conditions 14 and 17 would be amended to reflect the wording received by the Highways Agency.

Members were circulated with an update sheet giving details of Natural England comments.

The recommendation was for approval subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement which required a financial contribution towards public transport improvements and public art, landscape and cycleway phasing, implementation of Wildlife Area, installation of new culvert under Bad Homburg Way and compliance with the Energy Strategy and the conditions as per the report with amendments to the wording of conditions 14 and 17. The application would be referred to the Government Office for the South West as a departure from the Local Plan.

During discussion Members raised concerns regarding comments received from Devon Wildlife Trust and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, in particular the on- going management of the wild life area to the east of the development.

The Head of Planning and Building Control confirmed that a 45 metre wild life corridor to the south of the site was proposed. In answer to Members’ questions, he confirmed that the management of construction traffic was covered by condition 14 and lighting on the site covered by condition 13.

The Planning Solicitor stated that the Section 106 Agreement could include the implementation of a wild life plan and that highway improvements should also be part of the Section 106 Agreement as well as public transport.

RESOLVED that, subject to referral to the Government Office for the South West as a departure from the Local Plan, planning permission for a development to provide mixed employment uses be approved, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement which requires a financial contribution towards highway and public transport improvements and public art, landscape and cycleway phasing, implementation of a Wildlife Area and an agreed Management Plan, installation of new culvert under Bad Homburg Way and compliance with the Energy Strategy, and the following conditions:

1)         Application for the approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of five years from the date of the permission and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The Development Manager presented the planning application for a redevelopment to provide 20 dwellings, parking, access to the highway, landscaping and associated works at the County Ground, Church Road, St. Thomas, Exeter.

The site had a planning approval for 100 residential units and this application was for the northern end of the site predominantly adjacent to Tin Lane. The fundamental change from the approved application was the removal of the three storey flats. The revised layout would provide a total of 20 residential units incorporating a one bedroom adapted flat with a carer’s bedroom.

The proposal would reduce the total number of residential units from 100 to 84 and would enable the widening of Tin Lane and the resiting of the internal access circulation Road adjacent to Tin Lane.

Members were circulated with an update sheet giving details of amended plans regarding changes to the disabled unit Plot 48.

The recommendation was for approval subject to a Section 106 Agreement which required affordable housing on site and a financial contribution towards the provision of community facilities, an education contribution, public transport improvements and traffic calming measures in the area and the conditions as set out in the report.

Mr Harris (agent) spoke in support of the application. He raised the following points:-

• this application would reduce the residential units on the site from 100 to 84
• would open up Tin Lane and improve amenity for potential residents
• had the support of the Highway Authority and planning officers
• there would be a purpose built ground floor flat for a disabled occupant and a carer
• No statutory consultee had objected
• the issues raised by the two letters of objection did not apply as this application was lower than the previous approval and would improve vehicle movement
• this proposal was a significant improvement on the previously approved scheme as there were fewer dwellings and better amenity space.

In answer to Members’ questions, Mr Harris clarified that the purpose built disabled unit would be slightly larger in size and would have a bedroom for a carer, the development would be designed with the home zone approach. He confirmed that the percentage of affordable housing had been agreed although the positioning within the development was still to be decided.

RESOLVED that planning permission for a redevelopment to provide 20 dwellings, parking, access to highway, landscaping and associated works be approved, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement which requires affordable housing on site and a financial contribution towards the provision of community facilities, an education contribution, public transport improvements and traffic calming measures in the area and the following conditions:

1)         C05 - Time Limit - Commencement

2)         C15 - Compliance with Drawings

3)         C17 - Submission of Materials

4)         C23 - Permitted Development Restriction

5)         C35 - Landscape Scheme

6)         C37 - Replacement Planting

7)         C57 - Archaeological Recording

8)         C72 - Highway - Estate Roads etc

9)         No part of the development hereby approved shall  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

Councillor Martin declared a personal interest as the applicant was known to him though his previous employment.

Councillor Shepherd declared a personal interest as the applicant was known to him though his work as a City Councillor.

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the planning application for an extension to the front of the existing house and the raising of existing roof to provide habitable accommodation within roof space at 12 Little Johns Cross Hill, Exeter. The site was in the Alphin Brook Conservation Area.

This application sought to bring forward the building line to be nearly in line with the front building line of the garage and a proposed bay window would sit in line with the garage. The proposal would also create a first floor level of accommodation. To achieve this, the roof height would be raised by about 1.3 metres and there would be a 1.3 metre high render band around the property, which would be disguised by extending the eaves on the front elevation. Roof lights would light the proposed first floor level accommodation.

Members were circulated with an update sheet giving details of two additional letters of objection.

Members were informed that the principle of accommodation in the roofspace was acceptable although the submitted proposal was of poor architectural design. The recommendation was for refusal for the reason as set out in the report.

Ms Lenton (applicant) spoke in support of the application. She raised the following points:-

• this was 1950 bungalow and this application was to create a family home and improve the bungalow
• the proposal would enhance and improve the conservation area
• had been in talks with planning officers for a year
• the position of the garage does not allow for a front door
• officers had accepted the principle of conversion to two storey dwelling
• there was render on neighbouring dwellings
• would revisit the bay window if officers requested
• this proposal would improve the property

Councillor Coates, having given notice under Standing Order No. 44, spoke on this item. He raised the following points:-

• the applicant had been talking to planning officers for a over a year to find an acceptable proposal
• the applicant had received some ambiguous advice
• considered that a refusal could not be robustly defended at appeal
• garages were a feature of all the bungalows on Little John’s Cross
• although the garage did not meet the requirements of the Highways Authority they had not objected to the application
• the report stated that the proposal would be a discordant building in the  street scene; there was already discord in the street scene
• overall the proposal would enhance the street scene and would not have a negative impact on the conservation area
• would be unreasonable to refuse this application.

Members acknowledged that the principle of conversion from a bungalow to provide accommodation in the roofspace was acceptable.

Whilst some Members felt that the design of the proposal was acceptable, other Members considered the design to be unsatisfactory and that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The Development Manager presented the application for planning permission for a two storey extension on the west elevation and single storey extension on south elevation at 31 Cornmill Crescent, Exeter.

Members were circulated with an update sheet giving details of the amended plans received which showed a set back from the front building line of 900mm.

The recommendation was for approval subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

RESOLVED that planning permission for a two storey extension on west elevation and single storey extension on south elevation be approved subject to the following conditions:

1)         C05 - Time Limit - Commencement

2)         The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in strict accordance with the submitted details received by the Local Planning Authority on 1 March 2010 together with the site location plan, one un-numbered plan received 1 March 2010 and two drawings numbered SC/3 and SC/4,as modified by other conditions of this consent.

            Reason: In order to ensure compliance with the approved drawings.

3)         Construction/demolition work shall not take place outside the following times: 8am to 6pm (Mondays to Fridays); 8am to 1pm (Saturdays); nor at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.

Reason: To protect the amenity levels currently enjoyed by the neighbouring residents.

4)         The walls and roof of the extensions hereby approved shall have an external finish to match the existing building unless otherwise agreed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the existing building.

(Report circulated)

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the report giving details of an objection that has been received by the Council to Exeter City Council Tree Preservation Order No. 612  at St. Petrocks Close, Exeter. He outlined the objections raised and confirmed that the site inspection party had supported the Tree Preservation Order.

Anne Haw spoke against the Tree Preservation Order (she circulated photographs of her garden to Members). She raised the following points:-

• recognised that this was a lovely tree but was poorly positioned when planted over 25 years ago
• Blue Cedars were impressive trees and should be planted in parklands not in the suburbs
• could grow to 100 metres tall and 33 metres wide
• the tree should be removed as it over shadowed her south facing garden
• reduced light to her garden causing moss and preventing plants from growing
• was causing damage to a cob wall causing an on-going cost of repairs
• this tree was not in the correct environment and should be removed.

The Head of Planning and Building Control confirmed that the owner of the tree could submit an application to undertake works to the tree such as pruning.

RESOLVED that the order be confirmed without modification.

(Report circulated)

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The report of the Head of Planning and Building Control was submitted.

            RESOLVED that the report be noted.

(Report circulated)

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the report updating Members on enforcement matters.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

(Report circulated)

To consider the report of the Head of Planning and Building Control.

(Report circulated)

The schedule of appeal decisions and appeals lodged was submitted.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

(Report circulated)

To agreed the Councillors attending the site inspections on Tuesday 11 May 2010 at 9.30 a.m. 

RESOLVED that the next Site Inspection Party will be held on Tuesday

11 May 2010  at 9.30 a.m. The Councillors attending will be D Baldwin, Edwards and Prowse.