Agenda and draft minutes

Planning Committee - Monday 6th September 2021 5.30 pm

Venue: Guildhall, High Street, Exeter

Contact: Howard Bassett, Democratic Services Officer (Committees)  01392 265107 or email  howard.bassett@exeter.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

46.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 355 KB

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2021.

 

 

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 28 June 2021 were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chair as correct.

 

 

47.

Declarations of Interest

Councillors are reminded of the need to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests that relate to business on the agenda and which have not already been included in the register of interests, before any discussion takes place on the item. Unless the interest is sensitive, you must also disclose the nature of the interest. In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, you must then leave the room and must not participate in any further discussion of the item. Councillors requiring clarification should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer prior to the day of the meeting.

 

Minutes:

Members declared the following interests:-

 

COUNCILLOR

MINUTE

Councillor Branston

Min. No. 49 non pecuniary interest

Councillor Mrs Henson

Min. No. 49 non pecuniary interest

Councillor D. Moore

Min. No. 50 non pecuniary interest

 

 

 

48.

Planning Application No. 20/0538/OUT - Land off Spruce Close and Celia Crescent, Exeter pdf icon PDF 536 KB

To consider the report of the Liveable Exeter Programme Director and City Development Strategic Lead.

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Principal Project Manager and Acting Major Projects Team Leader presented the outline application for up to 93 residential dwellings (Approval sought for details of access only, with scale, layout, appearance and landscaping all reserved for future consideration) (Revised Scheme).

 

The Principal Project Manager set out a detailed description of the site and surrounding area, including site photographs and an aerial view, panoramic views  from the site and adjoining fields and referred to the Zone of Theoretical Visibility as set out in the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment showing viewpoints from surrounding residential areas and surrounding hills. Photomontages of viewpoints had also been provided by the applicant from Cumberland Way, Tithebarn Way, Birchy Barton and Hillyfield Road. He reported the following main aspects of the proposal:-

 

·         35% affordable housing in accordance with CS Policy CP7;

·         three fields to the north to be secured as public open space as a ‘New Valley Park’ in perpetuity of approximately 9.13 hectares as provided by the landowner;

·         the developable area of the two fields would be restricted to approximately 2.58 hectares with the remaining site area used as habitat corridor and informal open spaces. The fields were designated as Landscape Setting on the Core Strategy Key Diagram and the Exeter Local Plan First Review 1995-2011 Proposals Map. The public open space accessed from Spruce Close and Juniper Close was designated as Open Space on the latter, but was not designated as Landscape Setting. A Site of Nature Conservation Importance covered the vegetation along the northeast boundary of the lower field and the bottom right corner of the upper field;

·         access would be provided from the short access road leading from Celia Crescent to the site boundary and an access road across the public open space linking to Spruce Close. The access had been designed to facilitate an extension of the F1 bus route along Pinwood Meadow Drive/Spruce Close through the site and back along Celia Crescent/Chancellor’s Way;

·         new bus stops would be provided for the route approximately half way along Pinwood Meadow Drive, at the public open space adjacent to Spruce Close/Juniper Close and at the entrance to the site off Celia Crescent. The bus loop would be anti-clockwise;

·         contributions of £90,000 towards bus services, £1,000 per dwelling towards walking/cycling measures in area, £500 per dwelling towards travel planning, £3,558.74 per dwelling towards secondary education, £584 per dwelling towards patient space at GP surgeries and £13,000 towards upgrading local youth facilities;

·         there was a CIL liability of £118.93 per square metre of floorspace;

·         parameter plans had been provided covering land use, density, scale, access and movement and open space including a Local Area of Play in the middle of the site and a Locally Equipped Area for Play on the green space at the top of the upper field;

·         mood boards had been provided in respect of the higher and lower density area of housing and the new valley park;

·         the receipt of 463 objections and four neutral comments; and

·         objections from the Campaign  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

49.

Planning Application No. 18/0598/FUL - Hurst Almshouses, 2-24 Fairpark Road, Exeter pdf icon PDF 553 KB

To consider the report of theLiveable Exeter Programme Director and City Development Strategic Lead.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillors Branston and Mrs Henson declared non-pecuniary interests and left the meeting during consideration of this item.

 

The Assistant Service Lead Planning presented the application for the demolition of the existing dwellings and re-development of the site to create 31 nos. one and two-bedroom almshouse flats together with landscape enhancement to the adjacent Bull Meadow Park. The current three buildings were built in 1928, consisting of 12 one-bedroom almshouse flats.

 

The Assistant Service Lead referred to the following matters:-

 

·         the development was proposed as “car-free” with no on-site parking;

·         the building would be four storeys high facing Bull Meadow and two storeys high facing Fairpark Road;

·         the existing buildings were deemed to have a positive impact on the St. Leonards Conservation Area, and the site was just outside the Area Of Archaeological Importance in the Local Plan;

·         an archaeological investigation had shown significant archaeological remains;

·         private amenity space was to be provided for residents in the form of balconies, and a landscaped communal garden was also proposed to the rear of the building. There was also access to the adjacent Bull Meadow Park; and

·         the design of the proposed building was contemporary; however, it was heavily influenced by the traditional characteristics of the conservation area and the Almshouses.

 

The Assistant Service Lead also referred to the receipt of 129 initial objections and three neutral and two supportive comments with almost all objections relating to the loss of Bull Meadow and the receipt of a 415 petition primarily concerned with the loss of land caused by the turning head and increased traffic on Temple Road. On re-consultation, 32 representations had been received, including 30 objections. Other issues raised in objections included:-

 

·         traffic, specifically on Temple Road, during the construction phase;

·         character and the impact of the surrounding area, including St. Leonards Conservation Area;

·         level access;

·         scale, massing and height;

·         sewage and drainage matters; and

·         overlooking and outlook.

 

The Assistant Service Lead further reported the following:-

 

·         English Heritage had identified the proposal as causing “less than substantial” harm to the Conservation Area because the existing buildings contribute to local character, and the proposed buildings would unacceptably alter this character. The National Planning Policy Framework stated that where there was less than substantial harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset, this harm should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal;

·         the optimum viable use of this site was for affordable residential units;

·         public benefits of this application included the provision of an increased number of affordable residential units on the site, better accessibility to the residential units from Fairpark Road and into Bull Meadow Park and homes fit for purpose in the 21st century in terms of sustainability and internal layout; and

·         it was considered on balance that the public benefits of the development outweighed the harm to designated and non-designated heritage assets arising from the loss of the existing buildings or their replacement with a more extensive built development.

 

Responding to Members, the Assistant Service Lead advised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

50.

Planning Application No. 15/0641/OUT - Aldens Farm West land between Shillingford and Chudleigh Road, Alphington. pdf icon PDF 623 KB

To consider the report of the Liveable Exeter Programme Director and City Development Strategic Lead.

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor D. Moore declared a non-pecuniary interest and left the meeting during consideration of this item.

 

The Principal Project Manager and Acting Major Projects Team Leader presented the application for residential development including new access onto Shillingford Road and associated infrastructure (All matters reserved for future consideration).

 

The Principal Project Manager explained that it was necessary to amend two conditions listed in the original Planning Committee decision on this matter at the meeting held on 16 November 2020. At that meeting it had been resolved to approve subject to conditions and completion of a Section 106 Agreement. Following the approval, the applicants had raised concerns in respect of the proposed conditions 4 and 6 and had requested that they be amended. As they were highway related conditions the reasons provided by the County Highway officer together with the revised conditions were detailed in the report.

 

In light of the revised comments made by the County Highway officer and the legal opinion provided, revised conditions 4 and 6 were proposed. In addition, further contributions were required for inclusion within the Section 106 Agreement in respect of carrying out improvements to Markham Lane and pedestrian movements to the north of the site. These had been costed in the sums of £12,000 and £11,000 respectively to be payable on commencement of the development.

Juliet Meadowcroft spoke against the application. She raised the following points:-

 

·         the Alphington Village Forum objects to the development having only one access for 75 dwellings which exits on the narrow, steep Shillingford Road;

·         the developers will only extend the internal road to the eastern boundary and are not obliged to negotiate with the two landowners to create an access on to Chudleigh Road. This will exacerbate the problem of heavy traffic on this country road leading to Shillingford Abbot and Shillingford St George;

·         Vistry Homes also have an access from a much larger development comprising 280 dwellings with another 750 dwellings planned for on Markham Farm;

·         the obligations listed in the original Planning Committee report (16 November 2020);

·         £11,000 to Devon County Council as Local Highway Authority to complete pedestrian improvements to the north of the site;

·         and £12,000 to Devon County Council as Local Highway Authority to carry out improvements to Markham Lane.

·         Alphington Village is already seriously congested on a regular basis, yet the Highways officers state that this development is unlikely to result in a severe impact on the safe and efficient operation of the strategic road network;

·         the school and surgery are full and a new surgery is required;

·         the developer has ignored previous comments, including style and size of the houses overlooking Royal Crescent and Shillingford Road, which will block out the light and remove residents’ privacy; and

·         this development is only part of a development of 2,500 houses, half of which will be between the A379 and Alphington resulting in 1,000’s more cars.

 

Members recognised the need to regularise the legality of the conditions.

 

The recommendation was for approval, subject to the completion  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

51.

List of Decisions Made and Withdrawn Applications pdf icon PDF 16 KB

To consider the report of theLiveable Exeter Programme Director and City Development Strategic Lead.

 

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The report of the Liveable Exeter Programme Director and City Development Strategic Lead was received

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

 

 

52.

Appeals Report pdf icon PDF 223 KB

To consider the report of theLiveable Exeter Programme Director and City Development Strategic Lead.

 

Minutes:

The schedule of appeal decisions and appeals lodged was submitted.

 

RESOLVED that, subject to the addition of the words “and that the appeal should be dismissed” at the end of the last paragraph in 3.2 - 22 The Ridgeway, Exeter, the report be noted.