MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE HELD AT by 9U10QL

VIEWS: 1 PAGES: 15

									    MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
       HELD AT FOLLATON HOUSE, TOTNES, ON WEDNESDAY, 1 MAY 2002


                                       MEMBERS

                              * Cllr E T Mitchell - Chairman

                             * Cllr A J Nash - Vice-Chairman

           *   Cllr N A Barnes                              ø   Cllr J D Kelly
           *   Cllr M T Bonney                              ø   Cllr I Longrigg
           *   Cllr B E Carson                              ø   Cllr O G F Masters
           *   Cllr R M Eaton                               ø   Cllr J T Pennington
           *   Cllr B C Evans                               *   Cllr R Rowe
           *   Cllr S M Fairman                             *   Cllr J W Squire
           *   Cllr G J Fielden                             *   Cllr I P Steer
           *   Cllr G M Guthrie                             *   Cllr R J Tucker
           *   Cllr R W Hallett                             *   Cllr A R Vale
           *   Cllr V A Harvey                              *   Cllr A Ward
           *   Cllr J D Hawkins                             *   Cllr J B Washington
           *   Cllr E A Jarrold                             *   Cllr J A Westacott

                                   * Denotes attendance

                              ø Denotes apology for absence


DC.73/01   MINUTES

           The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 3 April 2002 were confirmed as a
           correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendment:-

           With regard to the site inspection visit undertaken in respect of application number
           52/2002/01/F (conversion of building to dwelling, Adams Orchard, Mill Hill, Stoke
           Gabriel), it was noted that along with the 10 specified conditions, an additional
           condition had been included relating to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement
           over an off-site parking area..


DC.74/01   DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

           Members were invited to declare any interests in the items of business to be considered
           during the course of the meeting. These were recorded as follows:-

           Cllr R J Tucker declared an interest in application number 35/0303/02/O (outline
           application for erection of agricultural workers dwelling, Weeke, Modbury), and left
           the meeting before discussion commenced thereon (see minute DC.76/01 and Appendix
           A below);

           Cllr J A Westacott declared a non-pecuniary interest in application number
           56/0364/02/F (3 metre extension to tower with antennae and associated equipment,
           NTL Transmitting Station, Totnes, Down Hill, Totnes) and left the meeting before
           discussion commenced thereon (see minute DC.76/01 and Appendix A below).




                                            -1-
                                                                                   Dev Cont 1.5.02



DC.75/01   SITE INSPECTIONS

           (a)   Applications deferred at this meeting

                 RESOLVED

                 That a Site Inspection Group comprising the Chairman and Cllrs
                 Tucker, Ward and two other Councillors to be decided, be appointed
                 to consider applications deferred at this meeting for that purpose.

                 In addition, the Chairman advised that all Members appointed to the
                 site inspection group would again receive paper copies of site
                 inspection agendas. He explained that as Cllr Ward and himself had
                 not been able to access the electronic version of the agenda papers
                 relating to the visit on 15 April 2002, they were absent at that site
                 meeting, for which he apologised.

           (b)   Report of Site Inspection Group meeting held on 15 April 2002

                 Erection of detached dwelling – Plot at rear of 38 Galpin Street,
                 Modbury (35/0373/02/F)

                 Consideration was given to a report of the Site Inspection Group relating to the
                 above planning application, when the decision about whether to recommend
                 the granting of planning permission was deferred, pending the receipt of
                 detailed measurements relating to the ridge height of the proposed dwelling in
                 relation to the ridge height of the 2 closest properties.

                 The Area Planning Officer reported that a detailed assessment of the eaves
                 heights of the adjacent properties had now been undertaken. She confirmed
                 that officers had now concluded that the ridge height of the new dwelling
                 would measure 2.5 metres less than the ridge height of ‘The Quillet’, the
                 nearest bungalow to the east of the site, and 1.4 metres above its eaves height.

                 During discussion, the following points were raised:-

                 A Member stated that as the exact measurements of the eaves heights of ‘The
                 Quillet’, the nearest bungalow, had fallen mid-way between the estimations
                 made at the site visit by the Area Planning Officer and the Ward Member, it
                 demonstrated that it had been appropriate for the group to have deferred its
                 recommendation, pending the receipt of such details.

                 The Member who had chaired the site inspection visit emphasised the
                 difficulties that the Group had encountered when it had attempted to estimate
                 the ridge and eaves heights of the proposed dwelling in relation to those of
                 existing dwellings nearby.

                 A Member reminded the Group that officers were of the opinion that the
                 proposal constituted a poor design, particularly because of its top-heavy
                 appearance. However, another Member reiterated the view which she had
                 expressed at the site visit about the design of the dwelling not being out of
                 keeping with the character of the locality, as a uniformity of design did not
                 exist within that area. Another Member who had participated in the site visit
                 echoed this view.


-2
                                                                                    Dev Cont 1.5.02



                  The Ward Member reminded Members that outline planning permission had
                  already been granted during August 2001 for the construction of a single-
                  storey dwelling on this plot of land. He stated that he supported the
                  application as he was of the opinion that the dwelling would be successfully
                  screened by trees, its ridge heights were lower than had been previously
                  estimated by officers, and that the locality was occupied by several 3-storey
                  dwellings.

                  In response to a Member’s question, the Area Planning Officer confirmed that
                  although the proposal related essentially to the construction of a 2-storey
                  dwelling through the installation of a dormer window, it would retain a 1-
                  storey external appearance.

                  RESOLVED

                  That in respect of application number 35/0373/02/F, planning
                  permission be granted, subject to the following conditions:-

                  1.      The commencement of development works to be restricted to
                          5 years;
                  2.      Works to be completed in accordance with revised plans
                          relating to lower ridge heights and in accordance with details
                          shown on the cross-sectional drawing depicting the height of
                          the proposed dwelling in relation to the height of the adjacent
                          property, ‘The Quillet’;
                  3.      No occupation until car parking facilities and access are in
                          place;
                  4.      No surface water to be discharged onto the County Highway;
                  5.      No occupation until drainage provision completed;
                  6.      Removal of Permitted Development Rights – extensions, roof
                          alterations or additions and out-buildings;
                  7.      Landscaping;
                  8.      Details of patent glazing.


DC.76/01   PLANNING APPLICATIONS

           The Development Control and Conservation Manager submitted details of planning
           applications as indicated in Appendix A.

           During discussion of these planning applications, the following motions were
           PROPOSED and SECONDED and on being put to the vote were determined as either
           CARRIED or LOST:-

           (a)    During discussion of application number 35/0303/02/O (outline application for
                  erection of agricultural workers dwelling, Weeke, Modbury), the following
                  motion was PROPOSED and SECONDED and on being put to the vote was
                  declared CARRIED:-

                          “That planning permission be granted, subject to the
                          following conditions: -

                          1.      Standard outline time limit of five years for commencement of
                                  development;


-3
                                                                                  Dev Cont 1.5.02



                      2.      Standard outline requirement of further details;
                      3.      Landscaping;
                      4.      Parking and access details;
                      5.      Removal of permitted Development Rights – extensions, roof
                              alterations or additions, out-buildings;
                      6.      No occupation unless drainage provision complete;
                      7.      Agricultural occupancy ”.


     The following matters were reported and noted by the Committee during consideration
     of DC.76/01 and Appendix A:-

     (i)     34/1802/01/F (farm access road, loading and
             car parking area and provision of pedestrian safety lighting –
             Marldon Christmas Tree Farm, Totnes Road, Marldon)

     Confirmation that a representative from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
     (RSPB) had visited the site and had not raised an objection on grounds of the site being
     a priority habitat area for Cirl Buntings. In addition, it was reported that the Council’s
     Tree and Wildlife Officer had also inspected the site and concluded that there was no
     evidence of Cirl Buntings nesting in hedgerows on the site. In response to a Member’s
     concern over an officer’s report about Cirl Buntings in the Westerland Valley in
     relation to the Marldon Ring Road, the Planning Officer identified the approximate
     location of the ring road and reiterated the RSPB advice. Reference was also made to a
     recent planning permission granted to Marldon Parish Council for the change of use of
     part of a field to recreational land, which was in an identified Cirl Bunting area, but for
     which there had been no evidence of Cirl Buntings in that field.

     Confirmation that the Christmas Tree use did not fall under the agricultural/forestry
     definition for the purposes of Permitted Development.

     Photographs were shown of the access track as taken from the County Highway,
     Totnes Road, showing the access road with its light finish and then in its latest dark
     colour, as of 29 April 2002. A photograph taken at dusk in order to highlight the
     impact of the safety lighting was also shown.

     The Planning Officer set out the planning history of the site since 1994, including
     reference to the appeal decision which allowed the new access onto Totnes Road.
     Photographs were also shown of the new access crossing over the Public footpath.

     The receipt of a late letter of representation from the Vice-Chairman of Marldon Parish
     Council was acknowledged, which had raised concerns about the proposed restricted
     use of safety lighting being in conflict with ensuring the safety of the new farm access
     road, to which the Planning Officer responded.           It was also confirmed that an
     additional recommendation would include reference to no white lines or other
     markings being made on the track.

     (ii)    05/0304/02/F (extensions and alterations to form 3 dwellings -
             Rathvendon, Marine Drive, Bigbury-on-Sea)

     Confirmation that the Consultant Engineering Geologists report commissioned by the
     applicants had concluded that concerns about the stability of the ground and potential
     for cliff erosion was insufficient to directly affect the property.




-4
                                                                                  Dev Cont 1.5.02



     (iii)   56/0364/02/F (3 metre extension to tower with antennae and associated
             equipment - NTL Transmitting Station, Totnes Down Hill, Totnes)

     The receipt of a total of 1012 letters of objection to the proposal up to the start of this
     committee meeting. It was also noted that a late letter had been received from Orange
     Telecom explaining how it intended to improve dialogue between its company and
     members of local communities where it proposed to site telecommunications masts in
     the future. In addition, the receipt of a late letter form ‘Airwaves’ was acknowledged,
     which had drawn attention to a recent Public Inquiry whereby appeal costs had been
     awarded against a local authority in Gloucestershire which had refused to grant
     planning permission for the installation of a telecommunications mast relating to
     ‘Airwaves’ on perceived health risk grounds.

     The proposal was fully described by reference to elevation drawings, plans and
     photographs from various angles.

     Reference was made to the landscaping condition attached to the 1997 planning
     permission for the erection of the original mast, which had not been implemented. It
     was confirmed that a similar condition was being recommended and would be
     monitored. It was reported that the Council’s Tree and Wildlife Officer was of the
     opinion that a Tree Preservation Order should protect a large oak tree occupying the
     site.

     It was reported that several objectors had felt that the newly introduced system of
     providing Members of this committee with just a sample of letters of representation if
     the number exceeded 30 was undemocratic, as the sample contained in the Members’
     bundle for this application had not included letters of objection written by a Doctor,
     Physicist and an Electronics Engineer, which had all raised concerns about perceived
     health risks. Therefore, the Development Control and Conservation Manager
     summarised these letters.

     (iv)    35/0464/02/CU (change of use to a taxi office -
             4 New Mills Industrial Estate, Modbury)

     The inclusion of an extra condition requiring details of the aerial to be erected on the
     rear of the unit.
.
     (v)     15/0350/02/DC (outline application for Sports Hall,
             ancillary accommodation and car parking –
             part of former heliport site,Townstal Road, Dartmouth)

     The inclusion of an extra condition relating to the completion of a Section 106
     agreement between the applicant (this Council) and Devon County Council over
     highways provision details. It was explained that if there was a proven need for such, a
     pedestrian crossing would be provided across Townstal Road, the type and location
     having been previously agreed before implementation. It was noted that confirmation
     had also been received that Devon County Council Highways section had no
     objections.

             RESOLVED

             That the planning applications considered at this meeting be
             determined as indicated in Appendix A to these minutes.




-5
                                                                                       Dev Cont 1.5.02




DC.77/01   ENFORCEMENT

           (a)     Unauthorised erection of steel flue on side elevation –
                   The Old Post Office, Battisborough Cross, Holbeton

           Members considered a report on the unauthorised attachment of a stainless steel flue to
           the external side elevation of the extension to ‘The Old Post Office’, which was
           situated in a prominent position at the crossroads of Battisborough Cross, Holbeton.
           The report explained that after approval was granted for the construction of a two-
           storey side extension and single-storey rear extension to ‘The Old Post Office’, an
           amendment was subsequently accepted by officers in May 2000 for the construction of
           a stainless steel flue to run on the inside end wall of the side elevation of the approved
           extension, via, the existing chimney. It was noted that officers had specified the
           construction of the external section of the chimney in brick to match the existing
           chimney. However, the report explained that the flue actually extended up and over the
           slate apron of the extension and projected above the eaves height and hipped roof.
           Therefore, officers were of the view that in such a prominent position, the flue created
           an adverse detrimental visual impact on the locality, and as such, was contrary to
           Development Plan Policies SHDC3, SHDC 15 and C4.

                   RESOLVED

                   That enforcement action be authorised to secure the removal of the
                   stainless steel flue situated on the side elevation of the property, or
                   implementation of the approved brick chimney, as agreed in the
                   amendment, within a compliance period of three months.

           (b)     Unauthorised works at the Mission House, 6 Bayards Cove, Dartmouth

           Members considered a report on unauthorised works to 6 Bayards Cove, Dartmouth,
           a prominent Grade II listed property situated within the designated Dartmouth
           Conservation Area. The report had noted that an original 19th century first floor
           balcony to the property had been removed for sandblasting and re-painting works
           during February 2002, but that it had yet to be re-installed, even after a letter had
           been sent to the owner and contractor on 3 April 2002 explaining that its long-term
           removal had required Listed Building Consent and constituted a criminal offence if it
           was not re-instated within the short-term. It was also noted that a compliance period
           for such action to be undertaken was set for 14 days. In addition, the report indicated
           that sliding sash windows also appeared to have been altered so that they hinged
           inwards, without having obtained the necessary permission and that a request for
           clarification of all works undertaken had failed to gain a response from the owner,
           his Solicitor, the Agent or Contractor.

           Members were advised that the applicant’s Solicitor had since entered into
           discussions with the Council’s Conservation Officer and that access to the property
           had now been gained. Therefore, the compliance period relating to the re-installation
           of the balcony without incurring enforcement action had been extended to 28 days,
           subject to damage to the balcony not having been caused.

           Members were advised that officers had confirmed that hinges had been fixed to the
           sliding slash windows, in order to allow the applicant to use a telescope and aid
           cleaning of these windows. However, it was confirmed that officers would monitor
           the property regularly in order to determine whether the sash windows were being
           kept open constantly, which officers deemed to create an inappropriate visual impact.

-6
                                                                                        Dev Cont 1.5.02



              It was explained that if the latter was the case, enforcement proceeding would
              commence.

              A Member expressed concern that the applicant had chosen to attach hinges to the
              sash windows, rather than just pushing them up open when required.

                      RESOLVED

                      1.      That enforcement action be authorised to secure the
                              reinstatement of the original balcony. Due to the significant
                              detrimental impact of the development on both the Listed
                              Building and the designated Conservation Area, the
                              recommended period for compliance be restricted to 28 days;

                      2.      That should the original balcony not be reinstated, prosecution
                              proceedings against both the owner and the contractor be
                              authorised;

                      3.      that the works to the sliding sash windows be monitored and
                              that should constant opening be observed, enforcement
                              action be authorised to secure that the works undertaken are
                              reversed, and the windows returned to their original state
                              and method of opening. Due to the significant detrimental
                              impact of the development on both the Listed Building and
                              the designated Conservation Area, the period for compliance
                              be restricted to 28 days;

                     4.       That as this property has been before the Development
                              Control Committee in previous months with regard to other
                              unauthorised works, which are currently being pursued, that
                              authority for enforcement action (including Listed Building
                              Enforcement Action) or prosection proceedings in relation
                              to any future unauthorised works at ‘The Mission House’, 6
                              Bayards Cove, or the attached 6 Bayards Hill be delegated to
                              the Chief Environment and Development Officer.


(Meeting commenced at 2.00 pm and concluded at 4.40 pm).




                                                                               _________________

                                                                                           Chairman




-7
                                                                                   Dev Cont 1.5.02



               DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE –3 MAY 2002

Number of letters circulated with Members’ bundle. (late letters circulated on day of
Committee meeting in italics)

NB:    where the number of representation letters received exceeded 30, a selection of such
       correspondence up to this figure were circulated.


34/1802/01/F                Number of letters circulated   16 of objection
                                                           4 of comment


19/0159/02/F                Number of letters circulated   3 of objection
                                                           1 of comment


05/0304/02/F                Number of letters circulated   5 of objection


30/0315/02/LB &             Number of letters circulated   1 of objection
30/0316/02/F


56/0364/02/F                Number of letters circulated   30 of objection (362)


62/0414/02/F                Number of letters circulated   8 of objection


35/0464/02/CU               Number of letters circulated   1 of objection
                                                           1 of comment




-8
                                                                                           Dev Cont 1.5.02



                                                                                         APPENDIX A

34/1802/01/F

Farm access road, loading and car parking area and provision of pedestrian safety lighting – Marldon
Christmas Tree Farm, Totnes Road, Marldon – Mr J Schurmann

MARLDON

Parish Councils’ Views – Objection

    The application is a large scale application in a sensitive Area of Great Landscape Value in
     Marldon.
    Contrary to policy, skyline road lights would cause Light Pollution, 70 vehicle car park contrary to
     policy and existing 35 vehicle car park does not have consent. Concern that trees are being
     imported into site. Do not consider use of land as Christmas Tree Farm falls within definition of
     “Agriculture”, and do not consider it to be a farm.
    Concern re adverse impact on footpath safety and consider that District Council is duty
     bound to ascertain the legal responsibility for compensation should an accident occur to a
     pedestrian walking the footpath if involved in collision with a vehicle.
    Concern that business rates are not being paid.
    Request that the Environment Agency physically visit the application site.
    Consider that an Environmental Impact Assessment is required for proper and
     comprehensive consideratiion of the application.
    Request that as part of its investigations, the Local Planning Authority should serve both a
     Section 330 notice and a planning contravention notice and request investigations and
     information regarding the delivery of trees to the site by 38 ton lorries from a site owned or
     tenanted by the applicant on Dartmoor.
    Request assurance that the planning application will NOT be presented for determination by
     the planning control committee until all investigations surrounding the issue of a planning
     contravention notice or a Section 330 notice have been fully and properly completed.
    Concern that applicant has proceeded with works needing planning permission in a very
     sensitive Area of Great Landscape Value.
    Request an on-site investigation by the Health and Safety executive as it is believed that
     public safety is put at risk if vehicles, including 38 ton articulated lorries, are allowed to
     cross the public footpath without any safety precautions.
    Consider it important that if application is granted consent, that there be a clear restriction of
     the use of the entrance and associated lighting i.e. between the last week in November and
     the last week in December, during the hours of 8am and 8pm.
    The whole area of Westerland is a recognised breeding ground for the protected and
     endangered Cirl Bunting and it is considered that traffic noise and visual effects may disturb
     the birds.
    An additional letter from Marldon Parish Council suggests that the District Council, having
     objected to the development of the Torbay Ring Road, should now similarly raise objections
     to the proposed access track at Marldon Christmas Tree Farm.

Officer Update – Photographs were shown of the access track as taken from the County Highway,
Totnes Road. The photographs showed the access track both with its whitish finish and as coated in a
dark colour, the latter being taken on 29th April. A photograph taken at dusk showing the lights shining
beside the track was also shown. The Planning Officer set out the planning history of the site since
1994, including reference to the appeal decision which allowed the new access onto Totnes Road.
Photographs were shown of the new access crossing over the public footpath. It was confirmed that the
RSPB had raised no objections to the application. In response to a Member’s concern about an officer’s
report about Cirl Buntings in the Westerland valley in relation to the Marldon ring road, the Planning
Officer identified the approximate location of the ring road and reiterated RSPB advice. Reference was

-9
                                                                                            Dev Cont 1.5.02



also made to a recent planning permission granted to Marldon Parish Council for the change of use of
part of a field to recreational land which was in an identified Cirl Bunting area but no Cirl Buntings had
been in evidence on that field. Members were advised that the Christmas Tree use did fall under
agriculture/forestry definition for the purposes of permitted development. A late letter from the Vice
Chairman of Marldon Parish Council was reported, summarised and responded to. In response to a
Member’s concern it was confirmed that a recommended condition would include reference to no white
lines or other markings to be made on the track.

Recommendation – Conditional Approval

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Drive Finish (including no white lines)
Lighting Cowls
Lighting Use Restriction
________________________________________________________________________

19/0159/02/F

Erection of replacement storage building – The Mounts, Mounts, East Allington, Totnes, Devon, TQ9
7QJ – Mr T R Lethbridge

EAST ALLINGTON

Parish Councils’ Views – concerned about hours of use

Officer Update – None

Recommendation – Conditional Approval

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Storage
________________________________________________________________________

35/0303/02/O

Outline application for erection of agricultural workers dwelling – Weeke, Modbury, Ivybridge, Devon,
PL21 OTT – Mr & Mrs C A F Rogers

MODBURY

Parish Councils’ Views – Support with agricultural tie

Officer Update – None

Recommendation – Refusal

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

Conditions:

- 10
                                                                                    Dev Cont 1.5.02



Standard Time Limit
NB1 Outline
NB2 Outline
Agricultural Occupancy
Landscaping
Parking
Exclusion GDO
Drainage
________________________________________________________________________

05/0304/02/F

Extensions and alterations to form three dwellings – Rathvendon, Marine Drive, Bigbury On Sea,
Kingsbridge, Devon, TQ7 4AS – Mr R Fletcher

BIGBURY

Parish Councils’ Views – No objection

Officer Update – Members advised that structural/geological report submitted to demonstrate
that extension would not be affected by coastal erosion

Recommendation – Conditional Approval

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Natural Slates
Materials
Balcony Screen
Obscure Glazed Window
Drainage
________________________________________________________________________

(i)    30/0315/02/LB
(ii)   30/0316/02/F

(i)    Listed Building Consent for extension to provide living room/kitchen and detached garage –
       Turnpike Cottage, Slappers Hill, Kingswear, Dartmouth, Devon, TQ6 OED – Dr A B Smith
(ii)   Extension to provide living room/kitchen and detached garage – Turnpike Cottage, Slappers
       Hill, Kingswear, Dartmouth, Devon, TQ6 OED – Dr A B Smith

KINGSWEAR

Parish Councils’ Views – Objection due to mass of the proposed extension which would be out of
keeping with the existing house. The rear elevation would dramatically change the appearance of
the Listed Building

Officer Update – None given

Recommendation – Conditional Approval – both applications

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval


- 11
                                                                                       Dev Cont 1.5.02



Conditions:
(i)     30/0315/02/LB
        Standard Time Limit
        Natural Slate
        Roof Ventilation
        Eaves
        Timber Cladding
        Windows and Doors
        Garage Door
        Hardsurfacing

(ii)   30/0316/02/F
       Standard Time Limit
       Natural Slate
       Roof Ventilation
       Eaves
       Timber Cladding
       Windows and Doors
       Garage Door
       Hardsurfacing
________________________________________________________________________

56/0364/02/F

3 metre extension to tower with antennae and associated equipment – NTL Transmitting Station, Totnes
Down Hill, Totnes, Devon – NTL

TOTNES

Town Councils’ Views – Recommend refusal of the application on the grounds that Radio Wave
Emissions have unknown dangers to health, masts such as these affect the overall ambience and
appearance of an important historic town. Totnes has a unique culture which is reflected in its
many shops and the proliferation of masts such as these could destroy this market advantage it
has over other towns and market centres. A perceived loss of amenity and trading.

Officer Update – The Planning Officer confirmed that 1012 letters of objection had been received.
 The proposal was fully described by reference to elevational drawings and plans and
photographs from various angles were shown to Members. Reference was made to a landscaping
condition, attached to the 1997 planning permission for the erection of the original mast, which
had not been implemented. A similar condition was being recommended and would be
monitored. The content of the letters of objection was addressed following response to the
officer’s selection of letters for the Members’ bundle. Members also advised about the Stroud
decision where costs had been made against that Council for being able to provide evidence of
basis for public concern about health risks




- 12
                                                                                     Dev Cont 1.5.02



Recommendation – Conditional Approval

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Removal of Mast
Cabinet Colour
Landscaping
________________________________________________________________________

62/0414/02/F

Proposed erection of detached dwelling and garage – The Manor Nursing and Residential Home, Fore
Street, Yealmpton, PL8 2JN – Wells House Ltd

YEALMPTON

Parish Councils’ Views – Objection

Officer Update – Environment Agency – no objections

Recommendation – Conditional Approval

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Original/Revised Plans
Access, parking completion
Exclude GDO rights to first floor windows east elevation
Natural Stone
Roofing details (Natural slate, Ridge, Eaves, Verge, Ventilation)
Joinery details and finish
Schedule of finishes
Hard Surfacing
Extractor termination details
________________________________________________________________________

35/0464/02/CU

Change of use to a taxi control office – 4 New Mills Industrial Estate, Modbury, Ivybridge, Devon,
PL21 OTP – Mr A Horrill

MODBURY

Parish Councils’ Views – State not enough information given about activities; question whether a
mast be erected; question whether it will be a 24 hour service; no information about valeting
service

Officer Update – Additional condition requiring details of aerial

Recommendation – Conditional Approval

Committee Decision – Conditional Approval

- 13
                                                                                         Dev Cont 1.5.02




Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Parking
No repairs
Office
________________________________________________________________________

35/0471/02/AD

Change of use to a taxi control office – 3 Church Street, Modbury, Ivybridge, Devon, PL21 OQW –
Luscombe Maye

MODBURY

Parish Councils’ Views – No objection

Officer Update – None

Recommendation – Refusal

Committee Decision – Refusal

Reasons for refusal:
The hanging sign by virtue of its size and position would be damaging to a building of historic
character and the setting of neighbouring listed buildings and the character and appearance of the
wider Conservation Area. Such action, if permitted, would not be in the interests of conservation
and local distinctiveness and would be contrary to Development Structure Plan Policies C9, C11
and South Hams Local Plan Policies SHDC1, SHDC18, SHDC19, the Local Planning
Authority’s adopted signage policy and emerging Local Plan Policies DEV2, ENV10, ENV12,
ENV13 and current Central Government guidance contained in PPG1 and PPG15.
________________________________________________________________________

15/0350/02/DC

Outline application for sports hall, ancillary accommodation and car parking, Regulation 3 LPA own
development pursuant to a decision of Executive Committee Minute E.111/01 dated 31/01/02 – Part of
former heliport site, Townstal Road, Dartmouth, Devon – South Hams District Council

DARTMOUTH

Town Councils’ Views – Approval

Officer Update – Confirmed Devon County Council Highways had no objections. Recommended
Section 106 Obligation – if there is a proven need for such a pedestrian crossing shall be provided
across Townstal Road, the type and location having been previously agreed before
implementation.

Recommendation – Conditional approval, subject to further conditions recommended by the
County Highway Authority




- 14
                                                                               Dev Cont 1.5.02



Committee Decision – Conditional approval, subject to further conditions recommended by
the County Highway Authority

Conditions:
Standard Time Limit
Outline
Parking/Turning
Access Road/Servicing
Surface Water Disposal
New Landscaping (on-site)
New Landscaping (off-site)
Protection/Management of Trees and Hedges
________________________________________________________________________




- 15

								
To top