|Minutes of a Meeting of the Planning Committee of Wrington Parish Council held in the John Locke room on Tuesday, 18th November, 2008
|Mr D. W. Glynn, Chairman
Mrs G. J. Bigg
Mr P. Ellis
Mrs J. Gallop
Ms E. P. Irving
Mrs P. Ledbury
|Mrs S.L. Dunn Morua
Mr G. A. Matthews
Mrs G. Moss
Mr R. L. Thorn
Ms G. Wilson, Clerk
Mrs C. A. Phillips
Mrs D. J. Yamanaka
2. Declarations of Interest
Cllr Glynn in relation to the access only to Gatcombe Farm. Cllr Ellis in relation to The Old Manse.
3. Public Participation
4. Minutes of previous meeting
The minutes of the meeting held on 28th October were reviewed and signed as a correct record.
5. Matters arising
The Clerk reported that she had written to NSC following the previous meeting to express concerns about 3 Church View, Felton, and an acknowledgement had been received from the Enforcement team that this was being investigated.
6. NSC South Area Planning Committee
It was reported that the application by BIA for the construction of a Walkway had been considered at the meeting held on 12th November. Cllr Bigg had attended this meeting to speak on behalf of CPRE, and she expressed the view that the application had been granted because there was a fear that otherwise NSC could suffer legal costs in the future. This was considered to be a disappointing outcome, as the Parish Council had been invited to comment on the application, but it appeared that these comments had not been taken into account.
It was noted that the application to build a separate dwelling on land at Cinderford Cottage, Ropers Lane, had been refused.
7. Decisions Notices issued by NSC
08/P/1998/F Long Cottage, Ropers Lane, Wrington: erection of a two storey detached dwelling. Application withdrawn.
08/P/2088/WT Cedar House, High Street, Wrington: tree works approved.
08/P/2030/F Barley Farm, Old Hill, Wrington: erection of agricultural barn and alternative bat roost approved.
8. Planning Applications
08/P/2081/ADV Plush Hotel, Redhill: Retrospective application for the display of 2no post-mounted illuminated signs. It was questioned whether the lights were actually being used at the moment, as no-one had seen them on when passing the location. It was agreed that the illuminated sign on the A38 would be acceptable, in view of the existence of other such signs along the road, however it was felt that illumination would be unacceptable for the sign on Lye Hole Lane, as this could be intrusive for neighbouring residents. It was therefore agreed to recommend a more discreet form of signage to direct visitors into the car park, eg: a reflective strip.
08/P/2313/F 18 Yeomans Orchard, Wrington: Conversion of garage into living accommodation with alterations to elevations. It was agreed to make no comment on this application.
08/P/2304/F Gatcombe Farm, West Hay Road, Wrington: Change of use from industrial to residential with erection of 11 sustainable dwellings with associated landscaping, meadow and woodland areas following demolition of existing industrial units and concrete hard standing.
Having declared an interest, Cllr Glynn stepped down and took no further part, then withdrawing from the meeting during debate, although not required to do so under the terms of the Code of Conduct.
Cllr Irving took the Chair for the discussion of this application, and asked for members’ views and comments.
Cllr Bigg said she believed that there was still an unresolved issue regarding the actual status of the site, following previous applications.
Cllr Matthews commented that the area was never likely to revert to ‘green grass’ and that there was currently a lot of rubbish on the site.
Cllr Bigg commented that as the site is in Green Belt, in that respect it should be treated no differently than any other application relating to Green Belt, and in addition the site was not adjacent to the village boundary. The only exception to this should be for the use of affordable housing, or some type of agricultural business, which would be of value to the community. On these grounds, she was against the proposed development.
Cllr Thorn said that he had sympathy with Cllr Bigg’s views, but it was a long time since any agricultural business had been operated there, and the whole site was currently ‘a blot on the landscape’. Other members were in agreement with this, and it was also felt that the use of the site for work units would only result in traffic and access problems.
In view of this, Cllr Matthews proposed that in principle the Parish Council should accept that the site should be used for housing. This was carried: 8 for, 2 against.
Cllr Irving then asked for views on the merits of the application currently before the Council. Cllr Thorn said he felt that the proposed development was exciting and adventurous in design, and could be built without undue impact on the landscape. It was very different from any previous development in Wrington.
Cllr Ledbury commented that although she liked the houses, she felt the layout of the site, with all the detached houses in a straight line, was very boring and she would prefer to see a staggered design.
Cllr Ellis said that the innovative design could make it an ‘award’ site for the developers, and this could be a benefit to the village. He also felt that the neighbouring residents would be happy with the plans.
Cllr Bigg said she was unsure whether the open and green nature of the site could be maintained once the houses were occupied, and Cllr Irving was concerned about the use of the space identified as ‘meadow’.
The matter of Section 106 was raised, and it was noted that the alterations to the highway were currently included in Section 106. It was agreed that this was not acceptable, and that the necessary highways work should be carried out as part of the development.
The question of water supply and whether the pressure was sufficient was raised, and also the matter of sewage disposal. Cllr Gallop said that the plans stated that new water and sewage schemes would be included in the development.
The Clerk pointed out that it was not necessary for the Council to express a view either for or against the development at this stage, but could make recommendations which the planning authority would be asked to take into consideration. It was therefore agreed to comment that whilst the Council would normally object to development in the Green Belt, in this particular instance, because of the history of the site, members would suggest a series of conditions to be included in any planning permission that was granted. These were agreed as follows:
· Necessary highways work to be a condition of the development, and not part of any Section 106 agreement.
· There must be provision of adequate water supply and sewage disposal, not only to the dwellings within the development, but also to neighbouring properties.
· That the development should not result in any increased flooding in the area.
· The communal areas of the site must be planted and maintained as shown on the plans, ie: as orchard, flower meadow, woodland, etc, using indigenous species. In order to ensure continuity, a management charge should be made on each dwelling to cover the cost of future maintenance.
· There should be a covenant to prevent any development in the future on the open areas of the site. Any change of use of these parts of the site should only be with the agreement of the Parish Council.
· There should be no extensions or conversions to the houses in the future, to preserve the original intentions of the design. Hedgerows around the gardens should not be replaced with fences.
· There should be no street lighting installed at the site.
· A cash contribution to the community should be made under Section 106.
9. Other Planning Issues
Cllr Glynn resumed the Chair at this point. It was agreed to write to the United Reformed Church to raise some of the concerns in relation to The Old Manse, which had been brought to the attention of the Council since the previous meeting.
There being no other business the meeting closed at 8.00 pm.
Mr. D W Glynn