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/

 

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

Parish: Ugborough

 

Outline application with some matters reserved for 7 self build/custom build dwellings (five open market and 2 affordable self-build plots)

 

Case Officer Update:        The Case Officer noted that further information had been submitted and circulated, and advised that the Flood Authority representative was in attendance to respond to questions

 

Recommendation:             Delegate to the HOP Lead Development Management in consultation with the Chairman to conditionally approve 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 Lead to refuse the application in the absence of an agreed s106 Agreement.       

 

During discussion, the Flood Authority representative responded to a number of questions of clarity.  The local Ward Member stated that the proposed drainage scheme for the development had no prospect of achieving the desired result, as it was dependent on use of third party land, for which permission would not be given. 

 

The Flood Authority representative advised that Ugborough was not high enough as a priority to receive funding from Defra towards a flood alleviation scheme, and therefore the Flood Authority would not be in a position to undertake flood mitigation works until at least 2021.  The proposal before Members enabled flood alleviation work to be undertaken by a developer, more quickly.

 

The local Ward Member stated that a scheme had been previously proposed that included flood alleviation work being undertaken on the applicant’s land.  The HOP Lead confirmed that the proposal could not be approved subject to a condition stating that flood alleviation work must be carried out on the applicant’s land.  The Solicitor confirmed that refusal of the application on the basis of the proposed scheme not being achievable because of the objection of landowners was not a route that she recommended, and Members should proceed with caution.

 

Finally, Members agreed that they wanted to support the proposal, but would delegate final approval, subject to approval of a drainage scheme, (as previously submitted), between the applicant and the flood authority, and the HOP Lead, Chairman and local Ward Member.

 

Committee Decision:         Delegate to the HOP Lead Development Management in consultation with the Chairman to conditionally approve planning permission, subject to the HOP Lead, Chairman and local Ward Member, and the applicant and Flood Authority, DCC approval of a drainage scheme

 

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

23.Dev32 compliance

24.Flood Emergency Plan

25.Submission of revised LDC

 

 

b)    2101/19/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 mixed use development of 9 serviced short term holiday let apartments (providing total of 16 bedrooms), 1 unit of managers accommodation and 5 residential apartments (resubmission of 2066/18/FUL)

 

Case Officer Update:        None

 

Speakers included:           Objector – Mr Ron Cole:  Supporter – Mr Mark Evans:  Parish Council representative – Cllr Alan Cooper:  Ward Member – Cllr Baldry

 

Recommendation:             Conditional Approval

         

Committee Decision:         Conditional Approval

 

Conditions

                   

1.   Time

2.   Accords with plans

3.   Details of a minimum of 10 integral nest sites (swift bricks) to be agreed and provided

4.   Parking and turning to be provided and retained

5.   Material details and samples for external materials including roof, fascia, render type and balcony balustrades.

6.   Hard and soft landscape scheme (full details of species, sizes, densities and locations of plants) to include the retention and enhancement of the existing boundary hedgerow, and material samples of hard landscaping. Scheme to be based on Landscape Concept Plan CD/C/553-01 D.

7.   No works to or removal of boundary vegetation until a management plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. 

8.   Hedge and tree protection

9.   A lighting strategy, to include locations, fixtures, lumens, and measures to reduce light spill for any external light fixtures.

10.Unsuspected contamination

11.CEMP

12.Provision of electric vehicle charging points

13.Details of levels

14.Holiday use restriction on the 9 holiday let apartments

15.Owner’s accommodation to be used by person who is mainly occupied in the management of the holiday units.

16.Pre-commencement – adoption and maintenance of drainage

17.Pre-commencement – detailed surface water drainage management scheme

18.Pre-commencement – construction phase surface water drainage management scheme

19.Pre-commencement – evidence agreed discharge rates with SWW

20.Travel plan for staff.

21.Full details of living walls including supplier, construction detail, proposed planting medium and plants and a maintenance schedules for life of wall.

22.Details of any ancillary structures including any fencing, gates, signage, sculptural features.

23.Louvres on first and second floor east facing windows to be provided prior to occupation and to be retained and maintained

24.During discussion, an additional condition was added that would prevent parking of cars and boats on the lawned area at the front of the building, other than the four overflow spaces already included.

 

 

c)    0545/19/FUL           Hill Cottage, Herbert Road, Salcombe

Parish:  Salcombe

 

Demolition and rebuild of 2 existing dwellings

 

Case Officer Update:          None    

 

Speakers included:             Objector – Mr Martin Trenchard: Supporter – Mr Mark Evans:  Ward Members – Cllrs Long and Pearce

 

Recommendation:           Conditional Approval

         

Committee Decision:      Conditional Approval

 

Conditions:

1.     Time Limit

2.     Approved Plans

3.     Materials

4.     Obscure glazing

5.     Surfacing

6.     Boundary Treatment

7.     Landscaping

8.     Drainage details

9.     Unexpected contamination

10.  During discussion, Members requested an additional condition that would require landscaping on the side elevations of the proposal

11.  During discussion, Members requested an additional condition to protect the tree at the front of the property

12.  During discussion, Members requested an additional condition relating to details of the balcony

 

 

d)  2416/19/FUL           Land at SX903 518, Kingswear

Parish:  Kingswear

 

Provision of a manege

 

Case Officer Update:      The Case officer apologised for errors in the report in the spelling of manege, in that the incorrect map had been attached, and the Parish Council representation had not been included

 

Speakers included:         Supporter – Mrs Amanda Burden:  Parish Council representative – Cllr Hector Newcombe: Ward Members – Cllr Hawkins (statement read) and Cllr Rowe

 

Recommendation:             Refusal

         

During discussion, a number of Members were of the view that the proposal would not be visible, particularly with the proposed landscaping in place.  Members also agreed that the proposal should be approved for reasons of highway safety.

 

Committee Decision:         Conditional Approval

 

Reasons:

In the interests of road safety, reduction in carbon arising from reduced travel, improving and enhancing the AONB with the additional landscaping and biodiversity

 

 

Conditions (final wording to be agreed with HOP, Ward Members and Chairman)

Standard Time

Standard Plans

Not for commercial use

Additional landscaping

Land returned if no longer used

Drainage details

No outside lighting

 

 

e)    2198/19/FUL           Post Barn, Ashprington Cross, Ashprington

Parish:  Ashprington

Cladding of existing gate and topping off of stone wall (Retrospective)

 

Case Officer Update:          None

 

Speakers included:             Objector - Ms Jo Cooke; Supporter – Mrs Amanda Burden; Parish Council representative – Cllr Lydia Stocks; Ward Member – Cllr John McKay

 

Recommendation:           Conditional Approval

         

Members had a detailed discussion on this item, and, having attended the site inspection, were concerned about road safety.  A plan was shown that moved the wall, but the plan was connected to an earlier application that had since been superseded.  There were discussions about the most appropriate height for a wall in that position, whilst accepting that a hedge could be grown with no limit on height.  Throughout the discussion the overriding sense was that the application should be refused on the grounds of highway safety and the subsequent vote was unanimous.

 

Committee Decision:         Refusal

 

Reasons

The increase in height of the wall has reduced visibility at a junction on a Class C County Road resulting in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, contrary to paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework; and Policy DEV29 of the Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan 2014-2024.

 

 

f)     1329/19/FUL           Commercial/Office unit, Endsleigh Park, Ivybridge

Parish:  Ermington

Construction of commercial/office building (Class B1), with associated car parking, access and landscaping

 

Case Officer Update:        Letter of representation received from Ivybridge Town Council – read in full

 

Speakers included:           Supporter – Mr Nick Toms; Ward Member – Cllr T Holway

 

Recommendation:         Refusal

 

During discussion, some Members were of the view that the existing units resulted in the proposal not being development within a countryside location.  There were a significant number of new houses in Ivybridge, and this proposal would provide employment within walking distance.  The recent Climate Change declaration supported this development by providing employment in a sustainable location, even though it had not been included as an employment site within the Joint Local Plan.       

 

Committee Decision:         Conditional Approval

 

Reasons:

Supporting a rural and sustainable employment site under DEV15

 

Conditions: (to be agreed with HOP, Chairman and Ward Members)

 

 

 

g)    2948/19/FUL           Land adjacent Sea View, West Hill, Heybrook Bay

Parish:  Wembury

 

Case Officer Update:          An additional condition should be included for details of retaining wall for driveway to be submitted and agreed

 

Speakers:                           Objector – Mrs Nicola Cuthbert; Supporter – Mrs Maureen Smith; Ward Member – Cllr Brown

 

 

Recommendation:           Conditional Approval

         

Committee Decision:      Conditional Approval

 

Conditions:

 

1.     3 year time limit for commencement

2.     Development to be carried out in accordance with approved details

3.     Sample of natural slate to be provided

4.     Details of render to be provided

5.     Details of joinery to be provided

6.     Wall to be constructed from natural stone 

7.     Rooflights to be flush fitting

8.     Tamar EMS

9.     Compliance with drainage scheme

10.  Retention of garage for parking/not be used for habitable accommodation

11.  Construction and Environmental Management Plan (prior to commencement)

12.  Development to accord with recommendations in ecology report

13.  No external lighting

14.  Removal of PD rights

15.  Compliance with landscape scheme

16.  Unsuspected land contamination 

17.  Carbon reduction measures to be implemented prior to occupation

 

 

h)    0379/19/FUL           Land on east side of New Road, Bickleigh Parish:  Bickleigh

Erection of new dwelling, landscape enhancements and associated works

 

Case Officer Update:          None

 

Speakers included:             Objector – Mr Duncan Tilney:  Supporter – Mr Richard Hawkes; Ward Member – Cllr Spencer

 

Recommendation:           Conditional Approval

 

During discussion, Members had differing views on this application.  Some Members felt that the development would be an intrusion in the landscape, and that the proposal was not exceptional enough to be approved under Para 79 of the JLP.  Other Members thought the proposal was exciting and the carbon neutrality of the design made it exceptional.

         

Committee Decision:         Refusal

 

Reasons:

 

1.     The proposed development would not meet the requirements of Paragraph 79 in that it is not sufficiently innovative and does not significantly enhance its immediate setting and therefore is an unsustainable unsupported development.

 

2.     The proposed development would have a detrimental impact on the ecology, in particular on the identified bat species.