Agenda and minutes

Councillor Sutton declared a disclosable pecuniary interests as an employee of the University of Exeter and withdrew from the room whilst Minute 58 was discussed. 

The City Development Manager presented the application for the construction of 82 dwellings, access, estate roads, landscaping and associated infrastructure. He set out revisions proposed by the applicant to address concerns regarding the impact the development would have on Old Rydon Lane and also referred to late representations received from residents which did not raise any new issues and to a traffic consultant’s report produced on behalf of an objector who was also a potential developer in the area. He stated that it was unknown if the two different developers had been in discussion on the matter of a potential access onto Admiral Way.

Responding to Members, the County Highways Development Manager stated that the proposed changes along Old Rydon Lane would undergo a safety audit prior to implementation. He stated that, should there be any incidents or traffic difficulties, the Police had the power to suspend the proposed Traffic Regulation Order.

Members were circulated with an update sheet - attached to minutes.

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

·         object to proposal as owners of the adjacent land;

·         no recent contact by either the County Council nor the Exeter Golf and Country Club regarding the ransom strip;

·         prepared to seek an agreement to allow the access to be formalised;

·         believe that access from Admiral Way is more suitable and options should be explored due to concerns relating to additional traffic generation in the area;

·         the development will result in dangerous traffic road conditions particularly on Old Rydon Lane where a traffic assessment shows a potential increase in traffic of between 23%-48% which is not considered sustainable and, will result in a rat run; and

·         only access to this area from the A379 is from Old Rydon Lane and during severe traffic congestion in the area or an incident blocking the road, emergency vehicles could face obstruction and delay.

In response to Members’ queries, he confirmed that the ransom strip was in the ownership of Persimmon and that it was the thin area of land, covered in shrubs, between the fence and the pavement at Admiral Way and that if the County Council placed a Compulsory Purchase Order on the land a decision would have to be taken as to whether to appeal against it.

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

·         the access road already built into Holland Park. Phase 1, was specifically built as a 5.5m. wide, Type R2 road to serve not only Phase 1 but also the proposed development of Phase 3;

·         there are just two existing houses in Holland Park, Phase 1, which face the Access Road. The rest all come off subservientestate roads within the development. There are therefore no highway safety or capacity issues with the existing access, asit is capable of serving far more homes than the number proposed;

·         Devon County Council have already given their full support and approval to the use of Old Rydon Lane for the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

To consider the report of the Assistant Director City Development.

The City Development Manager presented the application for the demolition of the existing halls of residence building (139 bedrooms) and a replacement building providing 251 student bedrooms arranged in 26 cluster flats including reception and common rooms, bike and refuse storage, repositioning of existing access with Lower Argyll Road, associated infrastructure and landscaping works.

Members were circulated with an update sheet - attached to minutes.

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

·         area was initially for residential purposes but is now dominated by student housing;

·         Members are still awaiting information on the number of students in the City in order to assess residential requirements and the annual report on student issues to the Planning Member Working Group is overdue due to staffing pressures. This further information should be provided before the Planning Committee considers further applications for student accommodation;

·         the University’s Deputy Vice Chancellor has commented that, resulting from Brexit, the number of EU students has dropped by 10% for Russell Group Universities, of which Exeter is one and that there is uncertainty on the level of non EU students seeking to come to Exeter in the future;

·         the development is 80% larger than the present block which will lead to 80% increase in noise, disturbance etc.;

·         Glenthorne Road is the main route into the campus which already suffers from  noise which will increase with the growth in student number;

·         existing problems and those likely to be caused by this development will be exacerbated with the development of a further 254 units, also on Glenthorne Road;

·         the statement that because of self-catering facilities students will no longer need to go to Bilks Hall for meals is a red herring;

·         a seven storey development will be detrimental to the area as well as impacting adversely on Duryard Lodge;

·         the development conflicts with Policy H5B of the Exeter Local Plan First Review which requires that a planning proposal should not create an over concentration of student housing which would unacceptably change the character of the area;

·         unnecessary to fell the proposed number of trees on Lower Argyll Road. The road looks very good with trees as they are now;

·         inadequate transport infrastructure in the area - the increased number of students will lead to increased danger generally through students using the desire line rather than the pelican crossing to access the Subway shop opposite the bus stop, queuing at the bus stop itself leading to dangerous conditions as cars seek to pass the stationery buses and from vehicles passing between Cowley Bridge Road and Lower Argyll Road;

·         theDuryard Trust, who own adjacent land, object to the development and refer to dangerous traffic conditions. The Trust suggests that a new access may be needed;

·         the Exeter Civic Society believe that the development is excessive for this small site;

·         weak carbon mitigation measures - a reduction in height could enable provision of solar panels; and

·         application should be refused  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

To consider the report of the Assistant Director City Development.

The City Development Manager presented the application for the construction of ground floor Retail Unit (218m² gross internal floor area) and 20 residential apartments with associated amenity space, parking and associated works and provision of an additional 20 parking spaces for use in conjunction with Newcourt Community Centre.

Mrs Hughes spoke against the application. She raised the following points:-

·         I, and local residents of Jack Sadler Way, believe that, because of the proximity of the development to our properties, we will be "goldfished bowled in" particularly as the number of units have been increased from eight to 20 and the balconies will overlook our properties;

·         the development will result in problems of noise, excessive traffic and dust during construction;

·         lack of green space for youngsters to play ball etc.;

·         significant difficulty in and danger to children crossing the road because of the increase in traffic the development will bring and traffic chaos will result with the opening of the primary school; and

·         little room for delivery vehicles to turn.

The City Development Manager advised that the objector’s property boundary was 14 metres from the development and that the distance to the property itself was 21 metres. He stated that specifying the hours of delivery was more relevant for the larger supermarkets than for the smaller retail outlet proposed as part of this development. The Highways Development Manager stated that the condition relating to a construction environment management plan would ensure that deliveries avoided school opening and closing times.

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

·         existing consent was for a larger, more imposing development than the one now proposed;

·         the development helped address the need for additional parking in the area;

·         a turning area and parking spaces for delivery vehicles were included in the parking area which is acceptable to the Highways Engineer;

·         balconies are provided to accord with policy requirements for private amenity space;

·         tried to reduce impact on neighbouring properties as much as possible. The overall size has been reduced and the flats on the top floor do not have balconies;

·         a Construction Environment Management Plan is included as a condition which is standard for developments of this nature; and

·         already in discussion with a potential occupier of the retail unit.

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

RESOLVED that, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the affordable housing provision (4 apartments for social rent), public availability and maintenance of the extra 18 parking spaces between the retail unit and Omaha Drive, and a contribution of £3,000 from the developer towards a Traffic Regulation Order relating to the works within the public highway to provide a raised pedestrian/cycle crossing over Omaha Drive, planning permission for the construction of ground floor Retail Unit (218m² gross internal floor area) and 20 residential apartments with associated amenity space, parking and associated works  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

To consider the report of the Assistant Director City Development.

The City Development Manager presented the application for the construction of 116 dwellings and associated works (Phase 2 development area). He explained that an acoustic fence would be required on the southern side as the site was adjacent to the consented commercial development at Moor Exchange. In addition the Highway Authority required that a connection through the southern boundary to the Moor Exchange site to the south would be available to buses, pedestrians and cyclist with private motorised vehicles prohibited. A number of small open spaces would be provided within the development but the main area of open space to serve the Hill Barton development would be delivered as part of the Ridge Line Park in a later phase with a contribution towards the much larger Ridge Line Open Space to which other developments would also be asked to/had contributed. 

The Highways Development Manager explained that the bus only route would be signage only because of longstanding problems across the County with a bollard system. The County did not wish to enable access for cars as it was believed that this would result in a “rat-run” from Hill Barton and Monkerton through onto Honiton Road causing capacity issues at the Moor Lane roundabout.

Members were circulated with an update sheet - attached to minutes.

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

·         do not object to the housing and only seek clarity on condition three for the bus link and condition five, the acoustic fence, changes needed to protect the commercial scheme;

·         the layout is driven by higher density and less internal roads but the opportunity has been missed for the main road to run along the hedge to act as a further buffer from the noisy commercial scheme, instead housing now directly borders the hedge; 

·         in return for greater density, Persimmon have proposed an acoustic fence to solve all the problems, but this is unclear. It is likely that a five/six metre plus acoustic fence is required. The worst case noise scenario from commercial operators needs to be defined so the specification can be appropriately agreed. If the specification of the fence is not sufficient to counteract the proposed noise from commercial operators, then it achieves little. Could condition five require the specification to reflect the proposed/likely noise via commissioned assessments from the commercial scheme and likely operators - at present it does not;

·         could Persimmon negate condition five and not install any fence at all as, at present, the site next door is a field, pending a revised commercial application and is not currently producing any noise;

·         lack of enforcement for the bus link into the Moor Exchange land before it reaches highway at Fitzroy Road. Any grey area on highway performance at the entrance of the site concerns potential occupiers. The Highways Engineer has confirmed the concern that the link will be a heavily used rat run and the concern over the junction performance, Honiton Road and Moor Roundabout, yet a bus only link  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

The meeting was adjourned for the following items to be considered at a further meeting of this Committee to be held on Monday 31 July 2017 at 5.30pm.

Planning Application No 17/0862/03 - Land off Exeter Road, Topsham

Planning Application No 17/0946/03 - The Quay Bridge, The Quay, Exeter Flood Defence Scheme

List of Decisions Made and Withdrawn Applications

Appeals Report

Site Inspection Party