Decisions

RESOLVED:

That planning application 48/21/0042 for the replacement of buildings at Hyde Lane Business Park, Hyde Lane, Bathpool, Taunton be APPROVED subject to the conditions as detailed in the Agenda report with an advisory note regarding screening the road frontage and an additional condition No. 20 to control the future use of the new units:

20. The premises shall be used for Use Classes E(g)(i), E(g)(iii) and B8 only and for no other purpose (including any other purpose in Class E of the Schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification).

Reason:  In the interest of highway safety and to protect the amenities of nearby residential properties.

(Voting: unanimous in favour)

RESOLVED:

That planning application 3/26/21/002 for outline approval with all matters reserved except for access for the erection of 8 No. dwellings (amended scheme to 3/26/19/024) on Land north of Huish Lane, Washford be APPROVED subject to conditions as detailed in the Agenda report, and a Section 106 agreement for affordable housing to provide either a financial contribution of £487,038 in lieu of affordable housing on site or provide 3 discounted open market properties at 40% discount from open market value in perpetuity.

(Voting; 8 in favour, 0 against, 1 abstention)

The Planning officer introduced the application to the committee with the assistance of a powerpoint presentation.  He explained the application was to vary a Section 106 agreement to remove the requirement to provide lighting to the link footpath.  He also provided the following updates:

·       Clarified the confusion in terms of the third-party representations as set out in the report.

·       Updated representations to reflect the comments of which the majority were regarding concerns for wildlife, particularly bats and light pollution.

He referred to the key considerations and detailed the benefits of both installing and not installing the lighting.  The recommendation was to agree to variation of the Section 106 Agreement in relation to the changes as requested to vary paragraph 1 of Part 2 of the S106 agreement dated 22 March 2017.

A representative from Somerton Town Council addressed the committee.  Some of her comments included:

·       The installation of lighting would allow for the safe inclusive and convenient access to local facilities that addresses the needs of all.

·       Acknowledge the concerns regarding bats but that suitable low lighting should be installed.

·       Once the footpath is fully surfaced it will be far more accessible and safer for pedestrians.

Division member Councillor Dean Ruddle addressed the committee.  He felt strongly that some form of lighting was essential on the bridleway as this was the only safe access from the site to the nearby town centre and local facilities.

The Applicant then addressed the committee.  Some of his comments included:

·       Development was well through construction stage with two thirds occupied.

·       Local residents were not in support of any lighting columns.

·       Illumination of the area would have an impact on the ecology and in response to the Ecologist and latest legislation there was the need to protect bats and safeguard wildlife in the area.

The Planning Officer responded on a visual representation made by Somerton Town Council of the bridleway and stated that in his opinion there was sufficient room to locate lighting columns should this be required. 

Following a question from a member on whether consultation had been sought from the Police Crime Prevention Officer the meeting was adjourned for a few minutes so that the Planning Officer could clarify this information.

On reconvening the meeting, the Planning Officer confirmed that the Crime Prevention Officer had been consulted but that no response had been received.

The Planning Officer then responded on the points raised by the public speakers and on points of detail and technical questions raised by members including:

·       Clarified that members simply needed to agree whether there was a requirement for the lighting or not and not on the specific detail.

·       Confirmed an Ecology survey had been carried out for the whole site and not just the bridleway and highlighted the conclusions made within the survey.

·       Confirmed that at reserve matters stage there was a discharge of a condition associated with this development and that the lighting design met the bat friendly requirement. The Highways Authority and Council’s Ecologist had also agreed a suitable design could be implemented.

·       Agreed that the application was compliant with current Local Plan policies that seek to secure safe, accessible non car pedestrian routes, particularly to town centres, that addresses the needs for all.

·       Referring to the plan clarified the location of the proposed lighting along the link footpath.

During discussion member made several comments including the following:

·       Felt that suitable lighting was much needed along this link footpath, as the alternative route along Cartwell Lane was a very busy road and therefore need to ensure a safe accessible pedestrian route out of the estate.

·       The lighting was an integral part of the development and infrastructure that was promised and would look to future proof this area and ensure safe non car accessibility for all.

·       Did not believe the lighting would have a significant impact on the dark skies of the area as it was already quite an urban area with an industrial estate close by.

·       Should this requirement be removed felt that Somerton Town Council may have to fit the bill for this lighting in the future.

·       Appreciated the need to consider the climate change emergency but that providing a safe 24/7 non car ‘access route with suitable low lighting was acceptable and essential for pedestrian in this case.

Following a short discussion, it was proposed by Councillor Tim Kerley and seconded by Councillor Peter Seib to refuse the changes requested to vary Part 2 of the Section 106 Agreement dated 22nd March 2017, contrary to the officer recommendation for the following reasons:

• Perception of personal safety
• Inclusive off road accessibility to the town centre

Members were content to delegate the exact wording of the reason for refusal to officers.

On being put to the vote this was carried by 8 votes in favour, 0 against and 2 abstentions.

RESOLVED:

To refuse the changes requested to vary Part 2 of the Section 106 Agreement dated 22nd March 2017 for the following reasons:

• Perception of personal safety
• Inclusive off road accessibility to the town centre

That delegated authority be granted to officers to agree the exact wording of the reasons for refusal.

(Voting: 8 in favour of refusal, 0 against, 2 abstentions)

Resolved:

To note the reports.

The Committee considered the Safeguarding Adults Annual Report and thanks the new Chairman for the comprehensive detail. The Committee asked for the priorities for the forthcoming year and supported these. The Committee invited the Michael Preston-Shoot to attend the Joint meeting in October and indicated they would welcome some further training on Safeguarding Adults for all Councillors.

The Committee discussed the report on Recovering Access to Primary Care. The requested more detail on the Somerset position in relation to ‘hot spots’ and details of the Quality based KPI’s being used. The Committee asked for regular updates and details on the communications being used to ‘sell’ Somerset as a location  as this may inform other areas.

The Committee discussed the forward Work Programme and made the following amendments:-

·         Add and additional meeting in October as a joint meeting with Scrutiny Children and Families,

·         Include an update on Suicide Prevention in the December update on Mental Health Services response times,

·         Update on the Ambulance Service performance,

·         Consideration be given to moving the December meeting to Yeovil.

The Committee discussed the latest Adult Social Care budget report and noted the details. The Committee asked for details on what is covered by Statutory requirements and what aspects fell in to Discretionary and the interdependence of each.

Resolved that the minutes of the Scrutiny Committee - Adults and Health held on 03 August 2023 be confirmed as a correct record.

Resolved:

To Grant Permission, as per the officer recommendation detailed in the agenda report.

(Voting: Unanimous in favour)

Resolved:

To Defer the application for up to 2 cycles to allow amended plans showing the footpath to be consulted upon and considered.

(Voting: Unanimous in favour)

Resolved:

To Grant Permission, contrary to the officer recommendations, on the grounds that the proposed alterations were of an appropriate design and detailing that would not harm the setting of the listed building, subject to conditions regarding the following:-

·         Time

·         Plans

·         Materials – external wall & roofs and window/door detailing

·         To be ancillary to main house

The wording of these conditions to be delegated to the Service Manager Planning North and agreed in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Planning Committee - North.

(Voting: 5 in favour, 4 against, 1 abstentions)

Resolved:

To Grant Permission, as per the officer recommendation detailed in the agenda report.

(Voting: Unanimous in favour)

Resolved:

To Grant Permission, as per the officer recommendation detailed in the agenda report, and subject to conditions Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 of application 06/22/00002 and an additional condition to secure agreement of refuse storage area prior to occupation of holiday units. The wording of these conditions to be delegated to the Service Manager Planning North and agreed in consultation with the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Planning Committee - North.

(Voting: Unanimous in favour)

2023/0516/ADV RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0516/ADV be REFUSED contrary to Officer’s recommendation due to the impact of the scheme on highway safety and visual amenity.

Votes – 6 in favour, 5 against, 1 abstention

2023/1084/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/1084/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 7 in favour, 4 against, 1 abstention

2023/0693/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0693/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 7 in favour, 4 against, 1 abstention

2022/2076/OUT RESOLVED

That planning application 2022/2076/OUT be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 8 in favour, 3 against, 1 abstention

2023/0959/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0959/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – Unanimous in favour

2023/0338/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0338/FUL be APPROVED contrary to the Officer’s recommendation as a departure, as the benefits of the scheme outweighed the harms to the conservation area. Delegation of conditions was made to Planning Officers, Chair and Vice-Chair.

Votes – 9 in favour, 2 against

2021/2805/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2021/2805/FUL be APPROVED in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation.

Votes – 10 in favour, 1 abstention

2023/0540/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0540/FUL be APPROVED contrary to Officer’s recommendation as the harm to the reduction of the listed wall would not outweigh the benefits of the scheme. Delegation was made to Planning Officers to negotiate details of the café extractor with the applicants and delegation of conditions was made to Planning Officers, Chair and Vice-Chair.

Votes – 6 in favour, 5 against

2023/0541/FUL RESOLVED

That planning application 2023/0541/FUL be APPROVED contrary to Officer’s recommendation as the harm to the reduction of the listed wall would not outweigh the benefits of the scheme. Delegation was made to Planning Officers to negotiate details of the café extractor with the applicants and delegation of conditions was made to Planning Officers, Chair and Vice-Chair.

Votes – 8 in favour, 3 against

The committee considered the Consolidated 2022/23 Outturn Report and accompanying appendices, and noted the information received.

The committee considered a presentation on the Property Rationalisation Programme, and noted the information received.

This item was withdrawn from the agenda and will be deferred to a future meeting.

The committee considered a presentation on the emerging Council Business Plan and noted the information received.

The committee considered a report and presentation on the Draft Assets Disposal Policy and noted the information received.

There were no declarations of interest from members.

Resolved that the minutes of the Scrutiny Committee - Corporate and Resources held on 8^th August 2023 be confirmed as a correct record.

Under this item the Chair advised the committee that members had volunteered to sit on the two Task and Finish groups as follows - 

Assets and Disposal of Assets 

Cllr PhilipHam, Cllr Brian Smedley, Cllr Dawn Johnson and Cllr Bob Filmer 

Commercial Assets and Realisation 

CllrMartin Cllr Nick Cottle, CllrPeter Seib, and CllrLucy Trimnell.  

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Brian Smedley (Cllr Kathy Pearce as sub), Cllr Nick Cottle (Cllr Henry Hobhouse as sub) and Cllr Emily Pearlstone. 

Following consideration of the officer report, appendices and discussion, the Executive considered:

Following consideration of the officer report, appendices and discussion, the Executive considered and commented on the information contained within the report, and endorsed the first Quarter 1 2023/2024 Performance Management Report for Somerset Council.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: As set out in the officer report

REASON FOR DECISION: As set out in the officer report

Following consideration of the officer report and discussion, the Executive agreed:

a.        The approval of the Homes in Sedgemoor annual company accounts as set out in the report.

b.        That the appointment of external auditors – Bishop Fleming – is endorsed further to the procurement exercise undertaken by Homes in Sedgemoor.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: As set out in the officer report

REASON FOR DECISION: As set out in the officer report

Following consideration of the officer report, appendices and discussion, the Executive:

a.        Agreed to note the final overall overspend for Somerset of £18.7m funded from reserves.

b.        Agreed the requested carry forwards of £0.5m.

c.        Noted the opening position of £26.8m General Fund Reserves as at the 1 April 2023.

d.        Approved that £23m of Earmarked reserves are transferred in General Fund Reserves to ensure they are maintained at the appropriate level and to receive a report detailing the amalgamated earmarked reserves position at the October Executive meeting. 

e.        Noted the opening position of £156.8m of Somerset Council earmarked reserves as set out in Table 4 of the report and the current commitments against those reserves.

f.         Agreed the additions and amendments to the Capital Programme in the last quarter.

g.        Noted the completed capital projects.

h.        Noted the position on capital receipts and commitments.

i.         Noted the outturn positions of Sedgemoor District Councils Housing Revenue Account (an underspend of £0.446m) and Somerset West and Taunton (an overspend of £0.227m). 

j.         Approved the capital carry forwards of £4.6m relating to Sedgemoor District Councils HRA.

k.        Approved the reduction of £8.8m for capital schemes no longer required within the previous Somerset West and Taunton HRA

The Executive recommended to Council:

l.         To note the year end position of the legacy Councils’ General Fund Capital Programmes and approve the carry forward requests of £99.5m and revised Capital Programme.

m.       To note the year end position of the legacy Councils’ HRA Capital Programmes and approve the carry forward requests of £90.4m and revised Capital Programme.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: As set out in the officer report

REASON FOR DECISION: As set out in the officer report

Following consideration of the officer report, appendices and discussion, the Executive:

a.        Noted the forecast overspend of £26.1m (as at month 4) for the year and the key risks, future issues and opportunities.

b.        Requested that each of the Scrutiny Committees urgently reviews the budget monitoring position for their areas of responsibility and that the relevant Executive members set out the reasons behind the current forecasts and the actions that are being taken to address the position. 

c.        Approved that member briefings are set to ensure every councillor has the opportunity to fully understand the financial current situation and the financial challenges facing the council going forward.

d.        Received a monthly update on the financial position and actions being taken to address it. 

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED: As set out in the officer report

REASON FOR DECISION: As set out in the officer report