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)

Councillor P.J.Brock declared a personal interest as a member of Devon County Council.

Councillor Prowse declared a personal interest as a member of Devon County Council.

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the planning application for the variation of condition two to allow minor alterations to the elevations of the approved building and condition eight to allow the first floor to be used for retail / restaurant / cafe purposes (Ref: 09/2050/03 granted 23/02/2010) at The Exebridge Centre, Cowick Street, Exeter.

The Head of Planning and Building Control informed Members of the comments received from the Devon County Council Head of Service for Communities and whilst they were committed to maintaining a library service for use by residents of the West Exe area, they had not agreed an acceptable rent with the developer and no longer had an interest in occupying the space.

The recommendation was to approve the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

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

• concern as there was not even a temporary library until mid-February
• Devon County Council had been extremely unhelpful
• the library at Exebridges was well used not only by local residents but those from neighbouring wards such as St. David’s
• there was a desperate need for a community facility and library in the West Exe area
• local residents were angry about the loss of the library
• the application should be refused.

In answer to Member’s questions, Councillor Hannaford stated that as a County Councillor he had been progress checking the position with County Council and would be raising the matter at the Council meeting this Thursday. Other sites for a library had been looked at including Bowhill Primary School, the Children’s Centre and the Showman Pub but none of these locations had been suitable. The education establishments were unsuitable due to the Health and Safety risk of the public entering the premises. He stated that the feeling amongst local residents was that the County Council were not serious about the provision of a library in the West Exe area.

The Chair was of the view that the County Council should be called to account on the matter of the provision of a library in this area.

The Planning Solicitor advised that Planning Committee would need to determine the application before them and in doing so would need to take account of the comments of Devon County Council.

Mr Bell spoke against the application. He raised the following points:-

• 71 objections had been received on this application
• 160 people had joined the Facebook page ‘Save St.Thomas Library’
• the application should be refused as it was contrary to Devon Structure Plan policies ST1 &ST3 and advice contained in the Exeter Local Plan section on Community Services
• approval would result in the loss of the library and no alternative site had been agreed
• the site was in a sustainable location, close  ...  view the full minutes text for item 114.

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

(Report circulated)

Councillor P.J. Brock declared a personal interest as he knows the objector.

Councillor Prowse declared a personal interest as a student landlord and he knows the objector.

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the planning application for the change of use from hotel to house in multiple occupation at 5 Bystock Terrace, Exeter.

Members were advised that 5 Bystock Terrace had been used as a hotel for approximately 25 years. The site was located within the St David’s Conservation Area and was a Grade II Listed Building. The proposal was to use the existing hotel accommodation as ten letting rooms with the existing kitchen, breakfast room and manager’s accommodation being converted into communal rooms. No physical alterations to the building were required to facilitate the proposed change of use.

Members were circulated with an update sheet advising that condition four would be deleted as it was not necessary.

The Head of Planning and Building Control advised that it was proposed that there would an additional condition requiring a management plan.

The recommendation was to approve the application subject to the conditions as set out in the report, with the deletion of condition four and an additional condition requiring a management plan.

Ms Fraser (representing St. David’s Neighbourhood Partnership) spoke against this application. She raised the following points:-

• St. David’s Neighbourhood Partnership represented over 1,000 households and businesses in the area
• challenged the figures regarding the student numbers; the current method of calculating student numbers was crude and basic
• would like the decision deferred to enable a more accurate count of students in the area
• the partnership would work with students to undertake a detailed count of students in the area
• there had been a recent influx of students
• would cause an in balance in the community
• asked committee to reject the application.

In answer to Members’ questions, Ms Fraser stated that student accommodation had become a profitable commodity that London Brokers wanted to buy up.

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

• was the agent for this application and the application at 12 Queens Terrace
• no planning reasons to refuse the application
• the hotel could not compete with hotel chains offering large discounts, therefore the owner had to look at alternative uses
• the proposed planning application was determined by land values and uses.

In answer to a Member’s question, Mr Dent clarified that that his client had instructed him to dispose of the property to the highest bidder.

In response to a Member’s query regarding the thickness of the internal walls and potential noise pollution, the Head of Planning and Building Control stated that, should insulation of the internal walls be required, then listed building consent would need to be sought. He also confirmed that as an HMO, the property would need to comply with the Private Sector Housing Licence requirements and that the refuse storage would be the same as that provided for the hotel.

RESOLVED that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

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

(Report circulated)

Councillor Prowse declared a personal interest as a student landlord.

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the planning application for the change of use from hotel to house in multiple occupation at 12 Queens Terrace, Exeter.

Members were advised that the site was located within the St. David’s Conservation Area and was a Grade II Listed Building. The existing hotel was arranged with nine letting rooms and manager’s flat but no dining facilities. The proposal was to use the existing hotel accommodation as nine letting rooms. The ground floor accommodation would be kitchen and living rooms for the house. No physical alterations to the building were required to facilitate the proposed change of use.

Members were circulated with an update sheet advising that condition four would be deleted as it was not necessary.

The recommendation was to approve the application, subject to the conditions as set out in the report, with the deletion of condition four and an additional condition requiring a management plan.

Mr Lacy (representing St. David’s Neighbourhood Partnership) spoke against this application. He raised the following points:-

• was the Chair of St. David’s Neighbourhood Partnership
• objected to the application
• student numbers in the immediate vicinity were in excess of the 20% stated in the Council Supplementary Planning Document
• would cause an imbalance in the community; there was a proposal for purpose built student accommodation for 260 students nearby at the Iron Bridge
• HMO permission would increase the value of the property
• would cause harm to the community
• disturbance of late night/early morning noise would have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of local residents making the area unattractive for family life
• would drive families out of the area
• would make the parking situation worse
• asked the Committee to defer the decision.

In answer to Member’s questions, Mr Lacy clarified that the owner would get more money for the property if it was an HMO and it was a flexible building that could be sub divided into two family homes.

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

• the building was occupied by the Esther Community from 1997 to 2004
• would cause damage to the fabric of the building if sub divided into family homes
• the student numbers in the area did not exceed 20%
• the development of chain hotels in the city offering discounts had put pressure on the viability of small hotels.

Discussion took place regarding the Supplementary Planning Document on student numbers and the need for the availability of different types of student accommodation.

The Head of Planning and Building Control stated that the 20% threshold did not apply to purpose built accommodation and the percentage households exempt from council tax were updated in May each year.

RESOLVED that the application for change of use from hotel to house in multiple occupation be approved subject to the following conditions:-

1)         The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later  ...  view the full minutes text for item 116.

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

(Report circulated)

The Development Manager presented the planning application for residential development consisting of ten detached dwellings, associated parking, garages and access at former Guide Dogs for the Blind Kennels, Exwick Lane, Exeter.

Members were advised that the application site was located on the eastern side of Exwick Lane immediately to the west of Exwick Heights School. The site was previously used for guide dog training purposes but had been unused for many years. It was occupied by kennels/runs, small ancillary buildings and was a brownfield site. Outline planning permission had been refused in September 2004 for 14 residential units and subsequently lost at appeal.

This proposal was for ten detached dwellings comprising six three bedrooms, three four bedrooms and one five bedroom. The heights varied from single storey, single storey with rooms in the roof space and two storey. The materials to be used would be brick, slate and timber windows with PV panels on the roof. There would be a footpath along the southern edge of the site connecting to Exwick Heights School. There was a landscape scheme proposed which included planting on land to the west of the site.

The Development Manager reported that one further email of objection had been received raising the issue of the footpath to Exwick Heights school being too close to Cleve House. He advised that the footpath was in the most convenient location for access to the school and that it was sufficiently overlooked by two of the new dwellings so as not to attract anti social behaviour.

Members were circulated with an update sheet advising that additional plans had been received to address concerns raised in respect of highway and landscape matters and that comments received from Devon County Council Highways considered that the revised highway access and circulation areas were adequate.

The recommendation was to approve the application subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement which requires a financial contribution to education (£18,010), traffic orders (£1,500) and Natura 2000 (£3,500), and the conditions as set out in the report.

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

• would like to see site developed as it attracted anti social behaviour
• needed a joined up approach with Devon County Council as Exwick Heights school was looking to expand due to increase pupils numbers and negotiations were taking place to purchase this site for the school expansion
• was an issue with traffic in the area and access to the school; the bollards on Exwick Lane were there for a reason to prevent car use and congestion
• community infrastructure in the area was poor, if the houses were built, there would be no land for the school to expand?
• there was a report due to go to Devon County Council Cabinet on 14 December regarding the expansion of the school.

The Development Manager stated that the Highway Authority had not objected to the application.

The Head  ...  view the full minutes text for item 117.

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

(Report circulated)

Councillor Bialyk declared a personal interest as a member of St Thomas Social Club which adjoins the application site.

The Development Manager presented the planning application for a mixed use development comprising 244 sq m of commercial floor space, six self contained flats, five courtyard houses, parking court and associated works at the former Speedway Garage, 63 Cowick Street, Exeter.

Members were advised that in July 2011 planning permission was refused for a three storey mixed use development with commercial space on the ground floor with seven flats on the first and second floors.  The rear section of the site was proposed to contain six townhouses providing a total of 13 units which would be served by 13 car parking spaces within the rear courtyard. The front of the site had planning permission which was granted in August 2008 for two retail units and seven flats.

This application sought to address the previous reasons for refusal and the number of units had been reduced to eleven. Each unit had its own amenity space, there was a communal amenity space to the rear and the car parking had been reduced.

Members were circulated with an update sheet giving details of comments from the Environment Agency and Living Options, Devon and that an additional condition in respect of Archaeology was required.

The Development Manager reported that one late letter of objection had been received.

The recommendation was to approve the application subject to no objection from English Heritage (if an objection was received it would be delegated to the Head of Planning and Building Control in consultation with the Chair and Deputy Chair), the completion of a Section 106 Agreement or other mechanism to secure a financial contribution to traffic orders (£1,500) and Natura 2000 (£3,850), the conditions as set out in the report and an additional condition in respect of Archaeology.

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

• welcomed that the previous application had been refused and pleased that this application was scaled down and provided amenity space
• overall in support of the application
• would improve Old Vicarge Road
• concern regarding the width of the pavement in front of the development as it was used by parents with pushchairs and disability scooters to access the nearby Health Centre
• did not need or want another takeaway in this location; they cause a lot of discarded rubbish which the Council then had to pay to clear up
• hoped that this development would be built out.

Mr Eaton (agent) spoke in support of this item. He raised the following points:-

• had reduced the number of units to improve amenity and provide green space
• each unit would have private amenity space by way of a balcony or roof terrace
• worked closely with planning officers on this proposal
• asked committee to support the officers recommendation.

In answer to Members’ questions, Mr Eaton clarified that a management company would manage the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

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

(Report circulated)

The Head of Planning and Building Control presented the Local Development Framework Annual Monitoring Report. He outlined the main conclusions in relation to the Local Development Scheme and monitoring results.

In response to Members’ questions, the Head of Planning and Building Control stated that the allocation of Gypsy and Travellers site would be covered in the report on the Core Strategy which would be considered by Executive in due course. Sites in the Strategic Housing Land Allocation Assessment had been put forward by developers as possible development sites.

RESOLVED that the Annual Monitoring Report 2011 be approved for submission to the Secretary of State.

(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 Head of Planning and Building Control presented the schedule of appeal decisions and appeals lodged.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

(Report circulated)

To advise that the next Site Inspection Party will be held on Tuesday 3 January 2012 at

9.30 a.m.  The Councillors attending will be Edwards, Newby and Sutton.

RESOLVED that the next Site Inspection Party will be held on Tuesday 3 January 2012 at 9.30 a.m.  The Councillors attending will be Edwards, Newby and Sutton.