Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 28 July 2021

DM.19/21         

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 28 July 2021 were confirmed as a correct record by the Committee.

Members are invited to declare any personal or disclosable pecuniary interests, including the nature and extent of such interests they may have in any items to be considered at this meeting;

DM.20/21         

Members and officers were invited to declare any interests in the items of business to be considered and the following were made:

Cllr B Taylor declared a personal interest in application 1129/21/FUL (Minute DM.22/21(b) below refers) as he was a Member of the South Devon AONB Partnership Committee.  The Member remained in the meeting and took part in the debate and vote thereon;

The Chairman to advise the Committee on any requests received from members of the public to address the meeting;

DM.21/21         

The Chairman noted the list of members of the public, and town and parish council representatives who had registered their wish to speak at the meeting.

To see Letters of Representation and further supplementary information relating to any of the Applications on the agenda, please select the following link and enter the relevant Planning Reference number: http://apps.southhams.gov.uk/PlanningSearchMVC/

DM.22/21         

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)    2560/21/FUL  “Former Brutus Centre”, Fore Street, Totnes, TQ9 5RW

          Town:  Totnes

Development:   Construction of new dwelling with associated groundworks and landscaping.

Case Officer Update:   

The Case Officer clarified that it was £210,000, not £210, for affordable housing offsite contribution, as detailed in the attendant report.  Concerns had been raised, with the Case Officer, about the build impact on the Red-wood tree roots system, and if the Tree Preservation Order had been breached: the Case Officer had not been able to consult with the Council’s Tree Officer but, if approved, could resolve post Committee meeting.  The Case Officer updated the Committee with the two conditions that had been missed off the published report, which were that work would be outside the bird nesting season, and to receive details of the balconies. 

It was also clarified that the application consisted of two storeys and a slightly recessed third storey, as opposed to the four storeys as outlined during the site visit.

It was stated that the loss of retail space was acceptable as the site had been on the open market for sale for a long time with no buyer.  Officers also felt that the loss of 25 parking spaces in the public car park was acceptable as there was a sufficiency of car parking provision elsewhere in Totnes.  Following a question from a Member, the Case Officer could not confirm the percentage loss of car parking spaces but would give this information after Committee.  Although there were no significant species found on site, various ecological conditions had been attached to the application.  The Case Officer confirmed she had not yet had a response from the lead Local Flood Authority.

One Member questioned whether the bin area was sufficient for the size of the development and queried how the bins would be emptied.  The Case Officer suggested a site warden would move the bins but this was not confirmed with the applicant.

The south elevation window material was confirmed as high end and that the cladding material was still under discussion with the applicant but could be conditioned if approved.  It was agreed that, if approved, the church tower view from Station Road would have to be built as shown and any loss to the view would be subject to enforcement action.  There was some debate about the accuracy of the photo montage, so a request was made that an accurate plan with the church and context in the background be requested from the applicant.

Following the case officer’s clarification of the affordable housing contribution, the Committee heard from the Plymouth City Council Viability Officer who had been instructed to advise the Council and the Council’s Affordable Housing Officer.  Members were unhappy with  ...  view the full minutes text for item DM.22/21

DM.23/21         

Members noted the list of appeals as outlined in the presented agenda report.  

The Senior Specialist, Development Management, provided further details on specific recent appeal decisions. 

DM.24/21         

Members reviewed the performance indicators as outlined in the presented agenda report, with update on staffing levels within Development Management and Enforcement teams.  A Member requested to meet with Planning Enforcement Officers to review cases within her local Ward.

DM.25/21                                 

Members noted the list of undetermined major applications.