Meeting documents

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Malcolm Cavill and Tiffany Osborne, Councillor Clare Paul sent her apologies for a late arrival to the meeting.

In accordance with the Council’s current Code of Conduct (as amended 26 February 2015), which includes all the provisions relating to Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI), personal and prejudicial interests, Members are asked to declare any DPI and also any personal interests (and whether or not such personal interests are also "prejudicial") in relation to any matter on the Agenda for this meeting. 

Members are reminded that they need to declare the fact that they are also a member of a County, Town or Parish Council as a Personal Interest.  Where you are also a member of Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council within South Somerset you must declare a prejudicial interest in any business on the agenda where there is a financial benefit or gain or advantage to Somerset County Council and/or a Town or Parish Council which would be at the cost or to the financial disadvantage of South Somerset District Council. 

Planning Applications Referred to the Regulation Committee

The following members of this Committee are also members of the Council’s Regulation Committee:

Councillors Neil Bloomfield, Malcolm Cavill, Adam Dance and Crispin Raikes.

Where planning applications are referred by this Committee to the Regulation Committee for determination, Members of the Regulation Committee can participate and vote on these items at the Area Committee and at Regulation Committee.  In these cases the Council’s decision-making process is not complete until the application is determined by the Regulation Committee.  Members of the Regulation Committee retain an open mind and will not finalise their position until the Regulation Committee.  They will also consider the matter at Regulation Committee as Members of that Committee and not as representatives of the Area Committee.

Councillor Mike Stanton declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (DPI) for planning application 21/01245/HOU (item 15) as he was the applicant.

Councillors Adam Dance and Crispin Raikes declared a personal interest for planning application 21/01245/HOU (item 15) as they are both also members of South Petherton Parish Council who had commented on the application.

Regarding item 8 - Grant to Stoke Sub Hamdon Parish Council, for transparency, Councillor Mike Hewitson noted his children attended some activities at the Hamdon Youth & Family Centre.

Councillors are requested to note that the next Area North Committee meeting is scheduled to be held at 2.00pm on Wednesday 25 August 2021. Meeting arrangements to be confirmed.

Members noted the next meeting of Area North Committee was scheduled for Wednesday 25 August 2021 at 2.00pm, and would be a virtual meeting using Zoom.

There were no questions from members of the public present at the meeting.

The Chairman reminded everyone present that in order to enable members to continue holding remote, virtual meetings, Full Council had agreed in April to amend part of the Council’s Constitution to allow its remote meetings to function as consultative meetings and delegate decisions to the Chief Executive (or the relevant Director in the Chief Executive’s absence) in consultation with those meetings.

This was extended at Full Council on 8 July 2021 for a further 6 months.

There were no reports from members.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Locality Officer presented the report which asked members to consider the awarding of a grant towards the purchase of an All-Weather Two-Lane 'TP365' Cricket Net System at Long Sutton Cricket Club. He advised that David Gibbins from the group was present to answer any questions from members.

Ward member, Councillor Gerard Tucker, commended the club for what they do and their engagement with the wider community. He noted the group, like many other organisations, had struggled with fundraising over the last 18 months due to the pandemic.

During a short discussion members expressed their support for the project and Mr Gibbins responded to points of detail and some of his comments included:

·         approximately 60 young people and 32 adult players were involved with the club, and numbers continued to grow.

·         The club very much supported youth cricket as well as adult, ladies and children's teams.

It was proposed to approve the grant as per the officer recommendation, and on being put to the vote, was carried unanimously.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Locality Officer presented the report which asked members to consider the awarding of a grant towards the refurbishment of Hamdon Youth & Family Centre. He advised that Barbara Brooks, Chairman of Stoke Sub Hamdon Parish Council was present to answer any questions from members.

Ward member, Councillor Mike Hewitson, expressed his support for the project and noted the parish council were heavily committed to the fantastic facility, which was well used by young people in the village and surrounding communities. He highlighted it was a listed building with its associated challenges.

During a short discussion members expressed their support for the project and Ms Brooks responded to a point of detail and explained that:

·        the Memorial Hall were on board with the project,

·        the project joined up with other village facilities and would not displace activities at the Memorial Hall.

It was proposed to endorse the grant and recommend it to District Executive, as per the officer recommendation, and on being put to the vote was carried unanimously.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Chairman introduced the item which asked the Committee to review its appointments to outside organisations within Area North.

During a very brief discussion, no changes to the existing appointments were proposed.

Cllr Tucker noted he had not attended a meeting of the Somerset Levels and Moors Local Action Group for many months, and as the programme had been due to close about a year ago, he requested if officers could check on the status of group and if an appointment was indeed still required, and this was agreed. He was content to continue as the representative.

It was proposed, and unanimously agreed, to continue with the current appointments for the 2021/22 municipal year.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

The Chairman introduced the report which asked the Committee to review the appointment of two members to act as substitutes for the Chairman and Vice-Chairman in the exercising of the Scheme of Delegation for planning and related applications.

There was no debate. The Chairman proposed Cllr Crispin Raikes as first substitute and Cllr Dean Ruddle as second substitute, which was unanimously agreed by members.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

A ward member noted the item for the Somerton Conservation Area had been on the Forward Plan for some time, and queried whether it should be removed.

In response, the Chairman advised that the new lead planning consultant was looking into the matter, and for now they had asked that the item remained on the Forward Plan.

Regarding the feasibility work being undertaken for a potential railway station for Langport / Somerton, a member suggested it would be useful to add a standing item to the Forward Plan for a verbal or written update when there was something to report, and this was agreed.

There being no further discussion, members were content to note the Area North Forward Plan.

Members noted the report that detailed the planning appeals which had been lodged, dismissed or allowed.

Members noted the Schedule of Planning Applications to be determined at the meeting.

Proposal: Application to vary conditions 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 10 of approval 18/01855/FUL (Demolition of existing dwelling and the erection 3 No. new dwellings), as varied by approval 19/02672/S73, to allow change to siting of the three dwellings, minor changes to internal layout and elevations and amended landscaping scheme.

(Prior to presentation of the application, the Chairman noted that Cllr Mike Stanton was acting ward member for the application in Cllr Malcolm Cavill's absence.)

The Specialist (Development Management) introduced the application and provided a comprehensive presentation of what was proposed in this application, an overview of previous approved permissions, and highlighted the key considerations. She noted some objections had been raised regarding climate change matters such as flooding issues and fitting of solar panels, however as such matters had been assessed with the original 2018 application it was unreasonable to introduce other matters now under this S73A application. Some concerns had also be raised regarding ecology issues as the site had now been cleared, however formal consultees had not raised any objections. No changes to the already approved scheme were proposed regarding highways, and the current widening of the access was temporary during construction.

She updated members that since the agenda had been published a letter of support had been received, and the parish council maintained their objection. It was explained that matters relating to the recent 2021 Fivehead Housing Needs Survey were not considered relevant as this application was considering changes to the 2018 permission.

Due to comments and concerns raised in representations, she explained in detail about the ground levels and re-positioning of the dwellings, and acknowledged that full detail about exact ground levels had not been provided in previous applications due to the site being overgrown. Overlooking was not considered to be an issue due to the distances, retained trees and proposed landscape planting. She advised that concerns raised about ownership, covenants or damage to third party property were a civil matter and not for the Local Planning Authority to consider.

If members were minded to approve the application, she suggested an update to condition 2 to update the approved details and include the finished floor plans to ensure the ground levels.

A parish councillor, Chairman of Fivehead Parish Council and a member of the public spoke in objection to the application, and some of their comments included:

·        Reference to their supplied slide showing current proposal overlaid over the 2018 permission.

·        Reference to the position of the houses and datum lines, don't believe the buildings have just been moved south.

·        There were failings for section diagrams in the previous S73 application.

·        The parish wanted what had originally been promised in the 2018 proposal - three modern houses in a woodland setting.

·        Referring to the landscape plan and tree planting - feel some works have been undertaken in breach of ecology conditions.

·        Concern now at the increased height of the buildings which consider to be unreasonable and will impact on privacy and residential amenity.

·        Feel  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Proposal: Greenhouse in upper part of garden.

(Councillor Mike Stanton, having earlier declared an interest as the applicant for this item, left the meeting prior to presentation and consideration of the application.)

The Specialist (Development Management) presented the application as detailed in the agenda. She updated members that the associated application for listed building consent (21/01246/LBC) had been withdrawn at the request of the Local Planning Authority to the applicant, as the consent was not required as the proposal was not joined to the listed building. She explained that the householder application was still required as the proposal was within the curtilage of the listed building. The key considerations were highlighted to members.

Ward member, Councillor Crispin Raikes, noted he didn't think the proposal would be seen from the listed building and would also probably be difficult to see from neighbouring dwellings. He had no objection to the greenhouse and proposed approval.

There was no further discussion, and the proposal to approve the application as per the officer recommendation, was unanimously carried when put to the vote.

(Voting: Unanimous in favour)

Planning application 21/01246/LBC was withdrawn at the meeting.

The Specialist (Development Management) updated members that the application for listed building consent had been withdrawn at the request of the Local Planning Authority to the applicant, as the consent was not required as the proposal was not joined to the listed building. She explained that the associated householder application (21/01245/HOU) was still required as the proposal was within the curtilage of the listed building - see previous item on the agenda.