Agenda item

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.54/18       

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:

 

 

a)     2066/18/FUL        Lantern Lodge Hotel, Grand View Road, Hope Cove

Parish:  South Huish

Demolition of hotel (14 guest bedrooms, 4 staff bedrooms, indoor swimming pool, lounge/bar/dining areas etc) and construction of a mixed use development of 9 serviced short term holiday let apartments (providing total of 15 bedrooms), 1 unit of owners/manager’s accommodation and 5 residential apartments

 

Case Officer Update:      Consultation period for final revisions ended 8 February, 2019, after publication of report.  26 late letters of representation received raising a few additional points such as concerns over light pollution, unattractive proposal, clarity sought on specification of privacy glass, clarification on distance of proposal from Cliff House and finally the proposal claiming it was not major development.  In response to the final point, the case officer explained the difference between major development as set out in the Town and Country Planning Act and the definition of major development in the AONB as set out in the NPPF.         

 

Speakers included:         Objector – Ms Jill Beavis: Supporter – Mr Simon Bird:  Parish Council – Cllr Jo Hocking;   Ward Members – Cllrs Pearce and Wright

 

 

Recommendation: Delegate to Head of Development Management Practice (HoP), in conjunction with Chairman to conditionally grant planning permission, subject to a Section 106 legal obligation.

 

However, in the event that the Section 106 legal Agreement remains unsigned six months after this resolution, that the application is reviewed by the HoP, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, and if no progress is being made delegated authority is given to the HoP to refuse to application in the absence of an agreed S106 Agreement.

 

During debate, Members referred to the points made by the Parish Council, particularly the high level of second homes already in Hope Cove, that the proposal did not offer any affordable housing, nor any contribution.  The increased footprint of the building would adversely impact the AONB, which deserved the highest protection, and the parking proposals were inadequate, and would exacerbate current difficulties along Grand View Road.  Members felt that the proposal was trying to ‘cram’ too much into the space, and did not see the need for five properties, a fewer number would be more reasonable.  The proposal would also result in overlooking and a detrimental impact on the neighbour amenity of the neighbours at The Cove.

 

 

Committee Decision:     Refusal

 

Reasons: 

 

1. Having regard to the scale, massing, design and siting of the proposed development it fails to conserve and enhance the landscape and scenic beauty of this part of the South Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is out of character with the area. As such the proposed development is contrary to Policies DP1, DP2, CS7 and CS9 of the South Hams LDF Development Plan Policies and Policies DEV10, DEV20, DEV24 and DEV27 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework in particular paras 127, 130, 170, 172 and 173.

 

2. Having regard to the extent to which the proposed development fills the plot, the number of apartments to be provided and inadequate provision of on-site parking the proposal represents an overdevelopment of the site that is likely to lead to over-spill parking onto the adjacent road(s) causing inconvenience to users of the highway and adversely impacting on residential amenity. As such the proposed development is contrary to Policies DP1 and DP7 of the adopted South Hams LDF Development Plan Policies and Policies DEV 20 and DEV31 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework in particular paragraphs 127 and 102.

 

3. Having regard to the scale, massing and siting of the proposed development it will have an overbearing impact on and result in an unacceptable level of overlooking to its neighbours to the south and east of the site. As such the proposed development is contrary to Policy DP3 of the adopted South Hams LDF Development Plan Policies and Policy DEV1 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan.

 

           

b)     4412/17/ARM      Land at SX 550 552, North of Canes Orchard, Brixton

Parish:  Brixton

 

Reserved Matters application for the approval of appearance, landscaping, scale and layout for 29no. dwellings

 

Case Officer Update:      Conditions updated and an additional condition related to play equipment being agreed in consultation with the Parish Council.

                                                                       

Speakers included:         Objector – Mr Michael Peddar: Supporter – Mr Andrew Lawrie:  Parish Council – Cllr Michael Wills;   Ward Member – Cllr Brown

 

Recommendation:         Conditional Approval

 

During debate, Members made reference to the site visit and generally felt that the proposed design was poor.  The indicative layout presented at Outline stage had not included a terrace that was created ‘back to back’ with existing properties in Phase Two, but this was included in the proposal for approval.  Members felt this represented poor design, and also felt that the play area should not be placed in the top corner of the site, the location being unsympathetic to those who would benefit from it.  Generally the layout had been ill thought through.

 

Committee Decision:     Refusal

 

Reasons: 

 

1.    Having regard to the layout and design of the proposed development including the remote location of the public open space in the north eastern corner of the site and its limited natural surveillance, the proposed development does not represent high quality design. As such the proposed development is contrary to policies DP1 and CS7 of the adopted development plan and DEV20 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework, in particular paragraphs 127 and 130.

 

2. Having regard to the siting and scale of the proposed houses adjacent to the southern site boundary the proposed development will have an overbearing impact on and cause overlooking to the existing houses to the south of site, adversely impacting on their residential amenity. As such the proposed development is contrary to Policy DP3 of the adopted development plan and Policy DEV1 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan.

 

 

c)     3460/17/OPA       Lutterburn Farm, Lutterburn Street, Ugborough

Parish:  Ugborough

 

Outline application with some matters reserved for 7 self-build customer build dwellings (five open market and two affordable self-build plots)

 

Case Officer Update:      Two further letters of representation had been received suggesting additional conditions, some of which could be incorporated into the Construction Management Plan

 

Speakers included:         Objector – Ms Joan Fletcher: Supporter – Mr Simon Baker:  Parish Council – Cllr George Beable;   Ward Member – Cllr Holway

 

 

Recommendation:        

 

Delegate to HoP Lead Development Management, in conjunction with Chairman to conditionally grant planning permission, subject to a Section 106 legal obligation.

 

However, in the event that the Section 106 legal Agreement remains unsigned six months after this resolution, that the application is reviewed by the HoP Lead Development Management, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, and if no progress is being made delegated authority is given to the HoP to refuse to application in the absence of an agreed S106 Agreement

 

During discussion, Members requested an additional condition regarding community space, to be confirmed at Reserved Matters stage, and a further condition regarding the buildings being zero carbon construction.

 

Committee Decision:     Delegate to HoP Lead Development Management, in conjunction with Chairman to conditionally grant planning permission, subject to a Section 106 legal obligation.

 

However, in the event that the Section 106 legal Agreement remains unsigned six months after this resolution, that the application is reviewed by the HoP Lead Development Management, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee, and if no progress is being made delegated authority is given to the HoP to refuse to application in the absence of an agreed S106 Agreement

 

 

Conditions:

 

1. Reserved matters time

2. Reserved Matters details

3. Accord with plans

4. Surface water drainage strategy prior to commencement

5. Surface water adoption and maintenance strategy prior to commencement

6. Construction phase drainage strategy prior to commencement

7. Details of connection to and condition of receiving watercourse prior to commencement

8. Ecological Mitigation and Enhancement Strategy incorporating recommendations of the PEA

9. TEMS Mitigation Strategy

10. Landscape Plan prior to commencement

11. CEMP prior to commencement

12. Accord with details of Arboricultural Work and Tree Protection Plan

13. Highways details prior to commencement

14. Highways construction infrastructure prior to commencement

15. Unsuspected contamination

16. Written Scheme of Investigation

17. Finished floor levels of plot 6

18. Site road and ground levels across flood zone

19. No piping of western watercourse channel

20. No external lighting to be erected upon dwellings without agreement of details with LPA.

21. Accord with LEMP

22. Details of tree retention

Additional conditions:

Community open space

Zero Carbon buildings

                       

d)     3944/18/FUL        14-16 High Street, Totnes

Parish:  Totnes

 

Change of use from Class A2 (bank) to a mixed Class A1/A3 use (coffee shop) together with shopfront alterations

 

Case Officer Update:      None

 

Recommendation:         Conditional Approval

 

Committee Decision:    Conditional Approval

 

 

Conditions:

1.      Time limit

2.      Accord with plans

3.      Times of opening

4.      Machinery/Plant operation times and deliveries

5.      A1/A3 use only

6.      Submission of plant details

 

e)     2785/18/FUL        Meadow Barn, East Portlemouth

Parish:  East Portlemouth

 

Engineering operations to create level pitches and use of land for the stationing of 3 x mobile units for holiday use

 

Case Officer Update:      Landscape Officer comments received and quoted to the Committee.

 

Speakers included:         Supporter – Mrs Liz Taylor:  Parish Council – Cllr Mike Harris:   Ward Member – Cllr Brazil

 

 

Recommendation:         Refusal

 

During discussion, Members referred to their site visit and also took account of the strong support of the Parish Council.  Members felt that the proposal would attract a different type of tourist and provide opportunities for tourism other than the prohibitively expensive option of renting a house in the area. 

                       

Committee Decision:    Conditional Approval

 

Reasons:

Low key low impact form of tourism, well hidden in the valley and would not spoil the landscape.  Exceptional circumstances for approval of the proposal in the AONB being that the proposal cannot be seen, no additional parking required.

 

Conditions:

1.    Size of concrete pads to be 4m x 10m

2.    Holiday use only

3.    Details of materials/landscaping/no external lighting/noise/colour of materials

           

 

f)      3744/18/HHO       Polston Green, Modbury

Parish:  Aveton Gifford

 

Householder application for proposed alteration and extension

 

Case Officer Update:      None

 

Speakers included:         Parish Council – Cllr Rosamund Brousson:   Ward Member – Cllr Bramble

 

Recommendation:         Refusal

                       

Members had a brief discussion on this proposal, but were persuaded by the support of the Parish Council and by attending the site visit and seeing the location of the proposal. 

 

Committee Decision:    Conditional Approval

 

Reasons:

No heritage issues, Doesn’t represent overdevelopment, no intrusion into neighbour amenity, design acceptable.  Ref to NPPF?

 

Conditions:

                       

1. Accordance with plans

2. Materials to be agreed

3. No further window openings

 

 

g)     1940/18/HHO       8 Crestway, Strete

Parish:  Strete

 

Householder application for extension and alterations to dwelling to form additional bedroom

 

Case Officer Update:      None

 

Speakers included:         Objector – Mr Nick Shepherd; Supporter – Mr Gareth Pinwell:  Parish Council – Cllr Kate Gill:   Ward Member – Cllr Foss

 

Recommendation:         Conditional Approval

 

During discussion, Members referred to the site inspection and noted that whilst the proposed extension to the front of the dwelling was acceptable, there were concerns over the extension to the back and the potential overlooking that would result.

 

Committee Decision:    Refusal

 

Reasons:

           

The proposed rear extension by reason of its size and rearward projection would result in an unacceptable overbearing impact and unacceptable loss of amenity adversely impacting upon the neighbouring properties, Nos. 7 and 9 Crestway. The development is, therefore, contrary to Policy DP3 of the Council’s adopted Local Development Framework, Development Policies Development Plan Document and Policies DEV1,DEV2 and DEV20 of the emerging Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan.

                       

 

 

h)     1189/18/HHO       Orchard Barn, Ermington

Parish:  Ermington

 

Householder application for re-location of access and extension to dwelling

 

Case Officer Update:      None

 

Speakers included:         Supporter – Mrs Amanda Burden:  Ward Member – Cllr Holway

 

Recommendation:         Refusal

 

During discussion, Members stated that the proposal was still subservient to the principal dwelling and the aspect was away from public view. 

 

Committee Decision:    Conditional Approval

 

Reasons:

The proposal was subservient to the building and would not be seen from the public view.  On balance, the proposal was appropriate and not detrimental.

 

Conditions:

1. Time limit for reserved matters

2. Accords with plans

3. Materials in accordance with details

4. Provision of sedum roof

5. No new openings in roof or elevations of extension

 

 

i)    2117/18/FUL   Woodland Barton Farm, Avonwick

Parish:  Ugborough

 

Application for new agricultural building to house livestock and for associated access

 

Case Officer Update:      None

 

Recommendation:         Conditional Approval

 

Committee Decision:    Conditional Approval

 

Conditions:

1.   Standard time limit

2.   Adherence to plans

3.   Surface water drainage

4.   Landscaping scheme

5.   Bird nesting informative

                       

 

j)       3558/18/TPO       6 Waltham Way, Ivybridge

Parish:  Ivybridge

 

T1:  Willow – coppice to 0.3m from ground level and re-coppice every 5 years, majority of trunk dead, has suffered extensive decay, works for safety reasons and to help regrowth

 

Case Officer Update:      None  

 

Recommendation:         Conditional Approval

 

Committee Decision:    Conditional Approval