DM.10/21
The Committee considered the details
of the planning applications prepared by the Planning Case Officers
as presented in the agenda papers, and considered also the comments
of Town and Parish Councils, together with other representations
received, which were listed within the presented agenda reports,
and RESOLVED that:
6a) 0900/21/HHO 12 Linhey Close, Kingsbridge, TQ7 1LL
Town:
Kingsbridge
Development:
Householder application for proposed internal and external
alterations
The Committee was informed that this application had
been deferred to review aspects raised from one set of neighbours
following the site visit.
6b)
2334/19/FUL Totnes Cross
Garage, A3122 Halwell Cross to Totnes
Cross, Halwell, TQ9 7JG
Parish: Halwell & Moreleigh
Development:
READVERTISEMENT (revised plans and amended description) Conversion
and extension of shop and commercial premises to create enlarged
retail area. New vehicle repair workshop and MOT bays, associated
access and parking
Case Officer Update:
The Council had recently received an energy statement showing
carbon reduction which culminated in a greater reduction than the
20% required, therefore the relevant reason for refusal was no
longer relevant. The Case Office
outlined that a further 63 letters in support had been received,
all reiterating the reasons summarised within the
report. One letter of objection had
been received outlining a concern that the intersection would be
more dangerous following this expansion.
Following questions from the Members, the Case Officer confirmed
that, should the application be approved, then a dormouse survey
may be required.
Speakers included:
Supporter – Mr J Hollis; Ward Member – Cllr Helen
Reeve;
During the debate, several Members noted the commitment of the
applicant to local produce and helping the local
community. It was also noted that the
entrance had not been opposed by Highways, and some Members felt
the new entrance may be an improvement.
The Head of Development Management clarified that the ecology
reports had suggested mitigations for the dormice issue and
therefore this could be reviewed by the Council’s Ecologist
and, if approved, would be conditioned.
Members then voted on approval of this application, citing the
following reasons for going against officer recommendation:
Reasons against –
1) not of a scale that would lead to additional trips, natural
growth to process, therefore there would not be additional
journeys, but there might even be a net reduction in journeys.
2) the benefits accrued meant it was necessary
3) the larger development up the hill would help diminish the
impact of the build and access would be an improvement.
Proposed conditions:
1) subject to dormouse issue resolution,
2) Landscaping and screening
3) Carbon reduction
4) External lighting
5) Provision of local produce based on the applicant’s
current sales and plan
6) Full conditions delegated to Proposer, Seconder, Chair, Ward
Member, and Head of Development Management.
Recommendation: Refusal
Committee decision:
Conditional approval
6c) 1944/19/FUL Land between
19 & 21 Clayman’s Pathway,
Ivybridge, PL21 9UZ
Town: Ivybridge
Development: Householder
application for proposed internal and external alterations
A Committee Member felt that the officer’s report did not go
into sufficient detail regarding potential flooding ...
view the full minutes text for item DM.10/21