Agenda and minutes

To sign the minutes of the meeting held on 24 April, 22 May and 26 June 2017.

The minutes of the meetings held on 24 April, 22 May and 26 June 2017 were taken as read and signed by the Chair as correct.

No declarations of interest were made by Members.

To consider the report of the City Development Manager.

The Principal Project Manager (Development) (MH) presented the application for the reserved matters application for construction of 116 dwellings and associated works (Phase 2 development area).

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

The Principal Project Manager advised that, following consideration by the Planning Member Working of the wider access issues in the area, Members had sought clarification on the legal/planning position in respect of the future composition of the commercial land in relation to access arrangements. He advised that this was purely a matter for planning judgement. In addition to information on the update sheet he reported that the agent for the developer of the commercial land had reiterated concerns in respect of the proposed layout, removal of the hedgerow, the nature of the acoustic fence, landscaping details and the need for a physical barrier for the proposed bus link. The agent had sought further information on the three road layout options put forward through a revised unilateral undertaking and the need for technical drawings to be provided on connections between the developments

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

·         do not object to the housing, but only seek clarity on three key boundary matters and request deferral for more consideration;

·         the layout is driven by higher density and do not object to this principle, however the opportunity has been missed for the main road to run along the hedge boundary to act as a further buffer from the noisy commercial scheme, instead housing now directly borders the boundary hedge, in some cases within 10 metres from a consented noisy service yard. The outline consent proposed to retain the 200m length of hedge, yet the commercial developer was only advised on 1 September that the hedge will be removed to ensure adequate parking and gardens are provided with the new boundary being the acoustic fence;

·         the photos show this 150 year hedge to be in a very healthy condition, acting as a 7 metre screen between residential and commercial sites, yet for its own convenience the applicant wishes to ignore their outline consent and ecology  assessment and remove this hedge out. There is no justification to remove and the hedge should remain and the acoustic fence delivered on the northern side of the hedge line, at present it is not. Together they would make an effective boundary between residential and commercial;

·         an acoustic fence is proposed to solve all the noise concerns and this matter is put sharply into focus if the hedge is now being ripped out. This was not clarified at the last committee meeting. But will the fence solve the problems? To serve the purpose it is likely a 5-6metre acoustic fence is required. This would be a high unsightly fence. Planning should be secured for this fence as part of this application To ensure this application is sound, deliverable and provides the comfort of ripping out this historic 200m hedge;

·         no landscaping details have been included and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

To consider the report of the City Development Manager.

The City Development Manager presented the application for Exeter’s Flood Defence Scheme. Variation to approved scheme at Quay Bridge (ref. 15/0172/03): Introduction of a headwall to leat downstream of Quay Bridge. Masonry-clad headwall with bottom-hinged flap gate, glass parapet and access walkway, together with a connecting demountable flood defence barrier system.

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

The City Development Manager advised that, following consideration at the Planning Committee meeting on 31 July when permission had been refused as it had not been demonstrated that the benefits of an increase from 1 in 75 year to 1 in 100 year standard of flood protection outweighs the harm to the setting of listed buildings or to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the Riverside Conservation Area, Members had met with Environment Agency representatives on site on 22 August 2017.

It had been recognised on site that alternative options were not feasible and that, although there would be some impact on the valuable heritage of the Quay, the need to protect homes in the event of flooding was paramount.

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

·         the project is to reduce flood risk to families and businesses and allow Exeter to thrive and the proposal was the only opportunity to reduce flood risk for this iconic location and prevent an excess of 100 homes and businesses being put at greater risk of flooding;

·         the design is the result of nearly a year’s discussions and compromise between officers from the Environment Agency, Exeter City Council and Devon County Council and from outside experts, representing heritage and engineering.  It is the best design that can be submitted; and

·         the defences proposed will sit sensitively within the Quay and will help frame the historic Quay Bridge and Custom House but will not draw attention away from their architectural features, apart from, perhaps, the gas pipework across the bridge).

Members recognised the need to avoid flooding problems in the area, similar to those experienced elsewhere in the country during adverse weather conditions, and therefore supported the application.

The recommendation was for approval.

RESOLVED thatplanning permission for Exeter’s Flood Defence Scheme. Variation to approved scheme at Quay Bridge (ref. 15/0172/03): Introduction of a headwall to leat downstream of Quay Bridge. Masonry-clad headwall with bottom-hinged flap gate, glass parapet and access walkway, together with a connecting demountable flood defence barrier system be APPROVED, subject to conditions, the wording of which to be delegated to the City Development Manager, subject to prior consultation with the Chair of this Committee.

To consider the report of the City Development Manager.

The report of the Assistant Director City Development was submitted.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

To consider the report of the City Development Manager.

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 19 September 2017 at 9.30 a.m.  The Councillors attending will be Prowse, Morse and Gottschalk.

RESOLVED that the next Site Inspection Party will be held on Tuesday 19 September 2017 at 9.30 a.m. The Councillors attending will be Prowse, Morse and Gottschalk.