Agenda and minutes

To record the attendance of Substitute Members, if any, who have been authorised to attend in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order 17(1), with notification having been given to the proper Officer before the start of the meeting and to receive apologies for absence.

The attendance of Substitute Members who had been authorised to attend in accordance with the Provisions of Standing Order 17(1) was recorded as referred to above with apologies for absence having been received from Councillors Richard Farrell and Margaret Turner.

To receive any declarations of Personal or Personal and Prejudicial Interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting. 

In accordance with Part 2 of the Local Code of Conduct and the provisions of Standing Order 34, any Member with a personal interest must disclose the existence and nature of that interest to the meeting prior to the matter being debated.  Where that personal interest is also a prejudicial interest, then the Member must withdraw from the room in which the meeting is being held and not seek improperly to influence any decision about the matter unless he/she has obtained a dispensation from the Standards Committee.

Members declared interest in report 05/06 as follows: -

To receive notification of any matters, which the Chair determines, should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances, which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the Chair.

The Chair reminded Councillors and members of the public to switch off their mobile telephones during the meeting.

Any statements and/or petitions from the public under Standing Order 32 will be made or presented at the meeting.

None.

Any questions from members of the public under Standing Order 32 will be asked at the meeting.

None.

Any statements and/or petitions from members of the public under Standing Order 33, relating to planning applications, will be made or presented at the meeting.

Three members of the public had given notice that they wished to make a statement at the meeting.

To consider any materials submitted prior to the meeting of the Committee.

ANY MATERIALS SUBMITTED WILL BE ON DISPLAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING.

None.

Dismissed

The following appeals have been dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate: -

(i)         Appeal by John A McDonnell against the Council’s decision to refuse to permit the erection of an open porch to provide covered access to the west door of the house at Cubs Puddle, Millway Lane, Appleton (APT/16711/4).  The decision to refuse permission was made by the Strategic Director under powers delegated to him under the Scheme of Delegation.  No reference to costs was made with the decision notice which is attached at Appendix A.

(ii)        Appeal by Peter White against the Council’s decision to refuse to permit the demolition of existing outhouse and an infill development of bungalow 39 Whitecross, Wootton (WTT/5825/3). The decision to refuse permission was made by the Strategic Director under powers delegated to him under the Scheme of Delegation.  No reference to costs was made with the decision notice which is attached at Appendix B.

Recommendation

that the agenda report be received.

The Committee received and considered an agenda item which advised of two appeals which had been dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate.

One Member welcomed the decisions of the Inspector in that they supported the Council’s Green Belt policies.

RESOLVED

that the agenda report be received.

A list of forthcoming public inquiries and hearings is presented.

Recommendation

that the report be received.

The Committee received and considered details of forthcoming public inquiries and hearings.  An amendment to the schedule was noted in that a date for a hearing in respect of ABG/1781/3 – 116 Oxford Road, Abingdon had been programmed for 7 June 2006 and not 31 May 2006.

RESOLVED

that the report be received.

To receive and consider report 4/06 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) attached.

The Committee received and considered report 04/06 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) which set out the implications of the Council being included on the list of Planning Standards Authorities for processing Major and Minor planning applications.  Historical and current performance for processing all planning applications were considered and an Improvement Plan was proposed in relation to Major and Minor applications.

The Committee’s attention was drawn to the performance over the last three years and it was noted that performance had fluctuated, mainly due to staffing difficulties.  It was reported that there were currently some staffing problems and therefore a slight dip in performance for this quarter was likely. 

Members were advised that the Scrutiny Committee at its meeting held on 13 April 2006 had recommended agreement of the Improvement Plan and Trajectory subject to an additional bullet point in paragraph 4 of the Improvement Plan specifying that all consultees were to be urged to respond within the statutory deadlines.  Also Officers were requested to put in place measures to enable the monitoring of the planning process in respect of major applications to enable the reasons for delay to be readily identifiable.

One Member commented that when a member of staff left the employment of the Council there could be a delay in getting a replacement member of staff in place due to the Council’s Managed Vacancy Policy.  He suggested that delays could be caused because of the need to consider providing suitable alternative employment to staff elsewhere in the Authority where their posts were being deleted.   He suggested that the Executive should be asked to look at this in detail to determine whether these factors had any impact on performance.

The Officers advised that the Managed Vacancies arrangement had now been halted and instead managers had been allocated 95% of last year’s staffing budget and were required to manage their staffing levels within that as far as possible.  It was recommended that some of the planning delivery grant should be set aside as contingency to cover periods of staff shortages.

One Member sought clarification of the targets and deadlines set out in the report.  It was explained that the Plan was a working document and that some of the targets had yet to be achieved.  To this end it was agreed that the deadline for these should be reviewed and included in the final document to be considered by the Executive

One Member commended the Officers for the new way of working which seemed to be accountable to some extent for an improvement in performance.  She paid tribute to the former Chair of the Committee, Councillor Sylvia Patterson, who had been keen to promote new working arrangements and she thanked the Officers for their work in this area.

In response to a number of questions raised the Officers made the following points: -

·                     This Authority had been included in the list of Planning Standard Authorities because of its poor performance in the year ending June 2005.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Committee received and considered report 05/06 of the Deputy Director (Planning and Community Strategy) detailing planning applications the decisions of which are set out below.  Applications where members of the public had given notice that they wished to speak were considered first.

Councillor Jim Moley had declared a personal and prejudicial interest in this item and in accordance with Standing Order 34 he left the meeting during its consideration.

The Committee noted that the previous application to convert the cinema included a report stating that the use was financially viable.  Therefore the main concern of the current application was the impact of a residential use so close to the cinema in terms of noise and vibration.  It was reported that Building Control had advised that works could be carried out to screen any noise to meet Building Regulations.  An acoustic report had been commissioned by the applicant which advised that there could be works to the building to prevent noise and disturbance.  The Council’s Environmental Health Officer had not objected to the application subject to conditions.

The Committee was advised that a further letter of objection had been received raising concerns regarding the adequacy of housing in Wantage; the loss of the cinema and concern that too many buildings were being put to unsympathetic uses.

One Member expressed concern that approval of the application would result in the loss of the cinema.

Another Member referred to the viability of the cinema commenting that one local resident had been of the view that approval of the application would fund repairs to the roof which would enable the cinema to re-open.  The Officers advised that the consultant’s report had assessed the viability of the cinema on what was already in place and not on the basis of this proposal.

One Member raised concern regarding a likely noise nuisance.  He questioned the position of the Council should a noise nuisance occur.  The Officers responded that the Committee needed to determine the application based on the information, advice and evidence before it.  It was explained that Members needed to make judgements about the professional assessments presented.  It was commented that a resultant noise nuisance could create problems for the operator of the cinema including subsequent financial costs to remedy any noise nuisance.

One Member commented that further guidance on whether the acoustic treatment was adequate would be beneficial in determining this application. It was suggested that a redesign of the second floor in terms of the position of main habitable rooms against the walls of the cinema could be sought.

One Member reiterated her concerns that there would be noise, vibration and disturbance and that approval of the application would result in the inability of the cinema to reopen which would be detrimental to the Town.

By 7 votes to 5 with 1 abstention and 1 of the voting Members not being present during consideration of this item, it was

RESOLVED

that the Chief Executive in consultation with the Chair and/or Vice-Chair and Opposition Spokesman of the Development Control Committee and Councillors Eddy Goldsmith and Derek Verdin as local Members be delegated authority to approve application WAN/1960/15 subject to the following: -

(1)               a redesign of the second floor if possible to position habitable rooms in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

Councillor Jenny Hannaby had declared a personal interest in this item and in accordance with Standing Order 34, she remained in the meeting during its consideration.

The Committee noted an amendment to the report in that planning permission for 44 apartments for the elderly had been refused in March 2005.

Further to the report, the Committee was advised that the County Engineer had raised no objection to the applications.  It was explained that as the site had an existing commercial use the proposed use would not result in a net increase in traffic when compared with full use of the site for commercial purposes.  It was noted that there would be junction improvements, signing, kerbing, demarcation and improved visibility.  Furthermore, the applicant had agreed to provide a crossing from the site across Mill Street to meet the adjacent footpath.  Therefore, subject to conditions, including a financial contribution of £10,000 towards traffic improvements, the County Engineer had raised no objection. 

The Committee was advised of an additional amendment to the report in that the County Developer Funding Officer had requested a contribution of £9,401 towards library, waste management and social health care facilities together with the provision of the required number of fire hydrants.

Members were informed that comments were still awaited on an ecological report, it being noted that the County Ecologist had not objected to the applications but had stated that there might be bats on the site and crayfish associated with the Letcombe Brook.

The Committee was advised that the Environment Agency’s holding objection had now been withdrawn

With reference to affordable housing, it was further noted that the comments from the Housing Officer had yet to be received.  It was explained that the provision of affordable housing would be based on a development density of 50 dwellings per hectare, with 7 units to be provided although exact details had yet to be agreed.  It was therefore suggested that should the Committee be minded to approve application WAN/7226/3 a condition should be added to address the need for affordable housing.   Furthermore, it was suggested that additional conditions should be added to any permission to address and control external lighting; to require revised fenestration on the southwest elevation; and control the design and provision of the bin store; battery car shelter; water boosting pump house; sub station and treatment of contaminated land.

Councillor Andrew Crawford speaking on behalf of the Town Council made a statement objecting to the applications raising concerns relating to matters already covered in the report.  He specifically commented on Mill Street raising concerns regarding pedestrian safety and the lack of a pavement.  He commented that a pedestrian crossing would be welcomed but that it should be in place before the new dwellings were occupied and that this should be a requirement covered by a condition.  He asked the Committee to be mindful of the suitability of any footpaths for use by the elderly and mobility scooters. He referred to the number of dwellings proposed commenting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

The Committee was advised of a representation received from the Highways Authority in respect of works to the highway land asking that detailed drawings should be submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to approval of the applications showing how the grassed area (railway sleeper arrangement) would be treated.  The Officers reported that this matter could be dealt with by condition. 

Furthermore, the Committee was advised that a letter had been received from the Hendred Estate, owners of the Pub, pointing out that the village green would not be affected by the proposal.

By 14 votes to nil, it was

RESOLVED

(a)        that application EHE/1474/4 be approved subject to: -

(1)               the conditions set out in the report; and

(2)               a further condition requiring that details of highways works to the grass verge should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any works.

(b)        that application EHE/1474/5-LB be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report.

None.