Agenda and minutes

To sign the minutes of the meeting held on 2 and 30 November 2015.

Subject to the amendments set out below, the minutes of the meetings held on 2 and 30 November 2015 were taken as read and signed by the Chair as correct.

2 November

·         the first bullet point in Min. No. 77 to read - “given the High Court Judgment in relation to the Village Green there remains uncertainty on the link road”;

·         the second bullet point in Min. No. 77 to read - “it is not satisfactory for the Committee to give approval at this meeting with an option to withdraw six months later. Approval should be delegated to the Assistant Director in consultation with the Chair once the Section 106 Agreement is signed and not in a giveth/taketh away manner.

30 November

·         Condition 7 of Min. No. 84 to read - “the building hereby approved shall not be brought into ......

Councillor Newby declared a discloseable pecuniary interest as a Trustee of the Exeter Municipal Charities and withdrew from the room whilst Minute 4 was discussed. 

The City Development Manager presented the application for demolition of the existing building and erection of a new building for student accommodation comprising 153 units (Use Class C2), cycle parking, works of hard and soft landscaping and other works incidental to the proposals.

He reported the following as additions to the circulated report:-

• Historic England were maintaining its objection to the proposal in terms of design and massing and the impact on the setting of key heritage assets. They continued to assert that the development would impact on the views from the Medieval Bridge of the tower of the Church of St Mary’s Steps and of Exeter Cathedral, although it recognised that following amendments to the scheme the Cathedral towers would be visible;
• concerns from Hidden Treasures Tea Room and the Intercom Trust that they had not been visited by the applicant to discuss their objections; and
• concern from the Intercom Trust that it had not received direct notification of the planning application and that the process was therefore flawed. The City Development Manager advised Members that the statutory notice had been placed on site and that, although there was no statutory requirement, individual properties had been notified - although the Intercom Trust had been erroneously omitted. Officers had subsequently met with the Intercom Trust on site. He confirmed that there was no legal reason why the application could not be determined. 

He advised that no objections had been received from Devon County Council and the Environment Agency.

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

Councillor Bull attended the meeting and spoke on this item under Standing Order No. 44. He made the following points:-

• since March 2012 one of the major  pieces of material consideration is the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which introduces a presumption in favour of sustainable development which is the “golden thread” running through planning. It is hoped that this does not mean that any development that can turn a profit for developers is sustainable? The NPPF states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development; good design; an economic role; a social role supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities through supplying housing to meet existing and future needs; an environmental role to protect the natural, built and historic environment ;and to move to a low carbon economy to address climate change. The application does not offer much clarity on these points;
• Historic England have serious misgivings over the photo-montages;
• Section 1 of NPPF states - “Building a strong, competitive economy” - but the application would not appear to support the thriving and growing artistic community and independent shops that we are starting to see flourish along Fore Street; 
• Section 6 of NPPF states - “Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes”. The Council’s Supplementary Planning Document seeks to deliver purpose-built student accommodation and looks to the city centre as the location for much of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

To consider the report of the Assistant Director City Development.

The Project Officer (Planning) (AL) presented the application for internal alterations associated with the conversion of eight units into five units.

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

• was offered a first floor apartment – Number 15 - in June and was very pleased to accept. It was on the understanding that this would be a temporary placement, as the Exeter Municipal Charity had plans to convert Numbers 14 and 15 into a single first floor two-bedroom apartment served by its own private stair. Support this proposal to be relocated;

·  the first inkling the residents had of this current application was a statutory notice issued by the City Council which caused quite a lot of consternation. A meeting of residents was called and it was decided to form the Magdalen Cottages Residents Association. Am speaking as honorary secretary to put forward objections and concerns of fellow residents;

·  at present the residents form a close-knit community centred on evening gatherings in the rear garden whenever weather permits. Any reduction in the number of residents will cause serious damage to their existing community, as some members will not return - community activities include shared shopping trips, food sharing, making preserves; and

·  the Trustees are members of the Almshouses Consortium who advise that upgrade of properties is necessary as, once they fall into disrepair, they become hard to let.

Mr Palmer spoke in support of the application. He raised the following points:-

• Exeter Municipal Charities is a not-for-profit, Registered Provider of affordable housing in the City’s specifically for older people in financial need;
• the Magdalen Road properties are small and no longer meet the space standards or arrangement of accommodation in line with best practice, but these are Listed Buildings which precludes alterations that will affect the historic character for the site;
• the ground floor extension has been designed and consent has been granted. This is not possible at first floor level without significantly increasing the overall mass of the building which is not acceptable to the Conservation Officer. The proposal therefore seeks to re-organise and amalgamate flats within the existing structure resulting in a reduction in the number of dwellings from eight to five;
• Trustees would prefer not to lose flats but the structure and listing impose limitations on what can be achieved. The objective is to ensure that the dwellings lost are replicated elsewhere and a number of sites have been identified where the density could be increased to provide additional dwellings;
• the concerns of existing residents are acknowledged and all residents have been consulted and will be handled sensitively. As with the ground floor construction will be delayed, until there are sufficient voids into which existing residents can be moved and that those who wish to move back will be able to. Moving expenses will be covered and ensure that they do not pay more for rent than they currently pay;
• Trustees need to take a longer term approach to the housing and make sure it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The report of the Assistant Director City Development was submitted.

            RESOLVED that the report be noted.

The schedule of appeal decisions and appeals lodged was submitted.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

To advise that the next Site Inspection Party will be held on Tuesday 26 January 2016 at 9.30 a.m.  The Councillors attending will be Newby, Raybould and Sutton.

RESOLVED that the next Site Inspection Party will be held on Tuesday 26 January 2016 at 9.30 a.m.The Councillors attending will be Bialyk, Newby and Sutton.