UPLYME PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE 1

Minutes of Planning Committee Meeting held on Wednesday 23rd Marchat 5p.m. in the Village Hall Committee Room.

Present: CllrsFrost, Garland(Chairman),Mason, Ostler, Prattand 17 members of the public.

The Chairman welcomed a large audience and stressed that all planning meetings are open to the public, despite rumours to the contrary that had been spread.

  1. Apologies for absence–Cllr Turner was away on business.

Meeting adjourned for open forum. Comments were expressed on 16/0526/FUL:
Mr Gregory spoke against the application on behalf of a number of residents, on grounds of heavy traffic and turning arrangements, visual impact on landscape and neighbouring properties, waste ammonia. Mr Taylor spoke regarding odours on a hillside site being blown towards housing, vermin and pollution. Mr Wellman referred to the small separation between an industrial site and nearby dwellings. Mrs Corbin spoke about the poor access on narrow roads with difficult turnings, and Mr Castle of lanes used by many pedestrians. Mr Liddiard mentioned ammonia and SO2that would need venting 24 hours a day.

  1. Minutes of the last Planning Committee meeting on 24thFebruarywere approved (proposed Cllr Pratt, seconded Cllr Frost).
  2. Declarations of interest: none.
  3. The Chairman moved to discuss item (e)on the agenda (16/0526/FUL) first, given the number in the audience who wished to hear the discussion.

The Planning Committee considered the following planning applications:

a)16/0526/FULLand East Of Redlane Cross Rocombe Erection of temporary agricultural workers' dwelling and poultry unit. There was extensive discussion of the application, but given the contradictions and poor quality of the online plans provided (the paper copies having been delayed in the post), the Committee did not feel it could make a final decision at this point. It was resolved unanimously to respond as follows:
“The Parish Council Planning Committee cannot make a final response given the sketchy and inconsistent nature of the plans submitted. Its interim response, subject to fuller information, is as follows:
The Committee is concerned about the proposal on the grounds of visual intrusion, possible odours, hillside development at a viewpoint in the AONB (EDLP Strategy 46), and HGV traffic on unsuitable roads used by many pedestrians. The proposed poultry shed is close to at least three dwellings (Hunters Cross Farm, 141m; Springfield Farm, 175m; and the curtilage of 15/2359/FUL will be just 49m away when built).
The Committee will require a detailed landscaping plan, a traffic management plan, and to read the opinions of Environmental Health and Devon Highways before it can make a final, properly informed decision”(proposed CllrMason, seconded Cllr Ostler).

b)16/0301/FULLand Adjacent 17 Glebelands Construction of 2 storey dwelling and off street parking.Replanting of alder trees in 16/0044/TRE appears to have been ignored. It was resolved unanimously to respond as follows: “The Parish Council Planning Committee objects to the application, which is supported by a statement from the Uplyme Neighbourhood PlanGroup. It wishes to reiterate that an application on this site has already been dismissed on appeal; and nothing has changed in its favour since then” (proposed Cllr Ostler, seconded Cllr Pratt).

c)16/0514/COUBridlepath Lodge Woodhouse Hill Retention of mobile home for use as an annexe and use of former riding arena for use as motor vehicle storage (retrospective). It was resolved unanimously to respond as follows: “The Parish Council Planning Committee does not object to the application”(proposed Cllr Frost, seconded Cllr Ostler).

d)16/0391/FULPitt White Mill Lane Construction of conservatory to side elevation. It was resolved unanimously to respond as follows: “The Parish Council Planning Committee does not object to the application”(proposed Cllr Frost, seconded Cllr Pratt).

e)16/0602/FULSpring House Two storey side extension. It was resolved unanimously to respond as follows: “The Parish Council Planning Committee does not object to the application in principle, but is concerned about the loss of garage amenity space on a dangerous crossroads”(proposed Cllr Mason, seconded Cllr Pratt).

Cllr Ostler declared an “other” interest in item (f) at this pointas an associate of the builder doing the work.

f)16/0340/FULCoombe Warren Gore Lane Engineering works to create new parking space in front garden. It was resolved unanimously to respond as follows: “The Parish Council Planning Committee does not object to the application, subject to creation of a porous surface on the new parking area and an Alco drain at the junction with the road to take surface run-off”(proposed Cllr Frost, seconded Cllr Mason).

There being no other business, the meeting closed at 6.00 p.m.

Signed:...... (Chairman) Date: ......