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/
Minutes:
DM.42/21
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) 1218/21/HHO 18 Meadcombe Road, Thurlestone, TQ7 3TB
Parish: Thurlestone Parish Council
Proposed Works: Householder application for extension and alterations.
Case Officer Update: no update
Speakers included: Objector – Ms Tsai Walton; Supporter – Mr Andrew Lethbridge; Ward Member – Cllrs M Long and J Pearce
During the debate, several Members agreed that it was a finely balanced decision, with some Members commenting that the new balcony would not greatly increase the overlooking which was already present. One of the local Ward Members commented that there were already many houses in the area with similar balconies. It was then proposed that there should be a condition added for obscured glass at the end of the balcony overlooking the neighbours at number 20 Meadcombe Road.
Recommendation: Refusal
Committee decision: Conditional Approval delegated to the Head of Development Management (DM), in consultation with the Chairman of the DM Committee, Vice Chairman, proposer, seconder, and the local Ward Member.
Conditions:
1. Time limit
2. Accord with plans
3. Surface water drainage
4. Obscure glazing/fixed shut up to 1.7m above FFL for 2 x windows on east elevation of extension
5. Obscure glazing up to 1.2m for balustrading as indicated in green
6. Adhere to ecological mitigation
6b) 1942/21/HHO Genesis, Loring Road, Salcombe, TQ8 8AT
Town: Salcombe Town Council
Development: (Revised plans) Householder application for alterations and extension to dwelling, including demolition of outbuilding (resubmission of application 0137/21/HHO).
Case Officer Update: No update. The case officer conceded that this was a finely balanced decision.
Speakers included: Supporter – Mr A Perraton; Ward Members – Cllrs M Long and J Pearce.
During the debate, Members agreed that there should be a condition added that would keep the four mature trees in the garden, these being two myrtles and two conifers. It was also decided to condition for the removal of PD (Permitted Development) Rights on creating any raised terraces.
Recommendation: Conditional Approval
Committee decision: Conditional Approval
Conditions
1. Standard time limit
2. Adherence to plans
3. Surface water drainage
4. Removal of PD for terraces/raised platforms
5. Retention of existing planting
6. Flat roof not be used as an amenity area
7. Adherence to ecological mitigation
6c) 0900/21/HHO 12 Linhey Close, Kingsbridge, TQ7 1LL
Town: Kingsbridge Town Council
Development: READVERTISEMENT (Revised plans received) Householder application for proposed internal and external alterations
Case Officer Update: There had been nine more letters of objection received, relating to issues on privacy. It was clarified that the balcony height would be raised by 280mm to accommodate the step down from inside out to the balcony. The Case Officer confirmed that this application had been made by a staff member and that, again, it was a finely balanced decision.
Speakers included: Objector – Mrs K Fradd; Supporter – Mrs K White presentation read out; Ward Member – Cllr D O’Callaghan;
During the debate, there was a discussion regarding obscuring areas of the glass to help mitigate overlooking but that there was already a large degree of overlooking built into the original design of the estate and the topography of the site. One Member felt that there would be the same level of noise in the garden with or without the changes, while another Member felt the application was inappropriate and unneighbourly. A condition for obscuring part of the glass was agreed.
Recommendation: Conditional Approval
Committee decision: Conditional Approval
Conditions
1. Standard time limit
2. Adherence to plans
3. Obscure glazing up to 1.2m for balustrading as indicated in green
6d) 3221/21/FUL Land on the South West side of Cliff Road, Wembury
Parish: Wembury Parish Council
Development: New dwelling
Case Officer Update: no update
Speakers included: Objector – Ms J Cox; Supporter – Mr D Stewart; Ward Member – Cllr D Brown;
Recommendation: Delegate to Head of Development Management Practice to approve conditionally subject to the completion of an acceptable S106 legal agreement to secure Tamar Valley European Marine Site monetary contribution.
Committee decision: Conditional approval subject to completion of S106 agreement.
Conditions
1. Time limit (3 years)
2. Approved plans
3. Construction management plan (prior to commencement)
4. Arboricultural information (prior to commencement)
5. Materials details
6. Landscaping
7. External lighting details
8. Ecological recommendations and enhancement measures
9. Provision of access and parking spaces prior to occupation and retained thereafter
10. Drainage – compliance condition
11. Two first floor windows on north west elevation obscure glazed
12. Adherence to DEV32 measures
13. Unexpected contamination
14. Removal of PD
6e) 4219/20/OPA Land at Three Corners Workshop, Moreleigh
Parish: Moreleigh Parish Council
Development: Outline application with all matters reserved for a permanent occupational/ rural workers dwelling
Case Officer Update: It was stated that the Council had not received written justification for approval for a new dwelling in the countryside, which was required.
Speakers included: Supporter – Ms A Burden; Ward Member – Cllr H Reeve (non-registerable interest declared)
During the debate, Members agreed there was insufficient information submitted on drainage, ecology, biodiversity, and climate change measures. The Agent stated that there had been written justification submitted but the Case Officer confirmed this was neither on the file nor on the Council website. Therefore it was voted that this application be deferred to allow for fuller information to be received and assessed.
Recommendation: Refusal
Committee decision: Deferral
Supporting documents: