Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor McCloskey, Councillor Cooke and Councillor Hegenbarth. Councillor Savage and Councillor Whyborn were in attendance as substitutes.

There were none.

Councillor Seacome and Councillor Fisher had both visited 35 Libertus Road.  

There were none.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 20^th June 2019.

The minutes of the meeting held on the 20^th June 2019 were signed and approved as a correct record.

Planning Application Documents

Officer introduction

MP introduced the application, she advised that the application was seeking planning permission for the installation of a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) comprising 4 courts, complete with 3m high twin wire fencing, and floodlighting to 2 of the courts.

She explained that the application was before the planning committee at the request of Councillor McCloskey, and was also the subject of an objection from the Parish Council.

Member Debate

DB: Noted that in the Parish Council submission they had suggested that the lighting be fitted with a time clock so as to prevent lighting being left on through the night. She queried whether a decision had been made on this. She also questioned whether the cumulative lighting effect had been considered by environmental health.

TO: Given the residents concerns he questioned whether it would be possible to condition the use of the 2 pitches nearest to residents so that they could not be used for team sports i.e. basketball as this would cause more disturbance to residents. 

JP: Noted that Sport England had requested a management and maintenance scheme be put in place before the courts were brought in to use. He questioned who had oversight of this plan and how would it be monitored.

VA: Noted that one of the residents who backs on to court suggested that the court should be turned 90 degrees in order to maintain a reasonable separation between the MUGAs and the residents of Willow Road, she questioned whether this had been considered.

MP in response:

-       She advised that they hadn’t imposed a condition regarding the time clock, however, if residents were experiencing issues with the lighting they could report this to the council and it would be dealt with through enforcement action. 

-       With regards to the cumulative effect of the lighting, she explained that this had been dealt with by environmental health who had advised that the lux levels on neighbouring properties would still be a zero value because of the nature of flood lighting. 

-       She highlighted that it would not be in there remit to restrict the particular sports played on the pitches, however, it was likely that the courts furthest from the residents would be used in the first instance.  As part of the community use agreement they could stipulate that the 2 courts closest to residents be used as a last resort. 

-       Sports England had requested that they be consulted on the community use agreement and the maintenance plan and so it would be devised in consultation with them.

-       They hadn’t specified that the court be turned 90 degrees as this would eat in to the existing playing facilities, if turned round it would also be feasible for flood lighting on all 4 courts which would intensify the lighting issue. DO reiterated that if it were to be flipped 90 degrees the piece of land would not be fit for purpose.

-       She confirmed that only the 2 courts  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Planning Application Documents

Officer introduction

GD introduced the application, he informed the committee that the site had been used as a privately owned care home since the late 1980s offering residential care for up to 13 individuals and the applicant was seeking permission to enable the property to be used as a 13 bed house in multiple occupancy (HMO). He highlighted that the application was for generic use and therefore the end use may vary.

He explained that the application was at planning committee at the request of Cllr Holliday due to level of concern amongst neighbouring residents.

Councillor Holliday speaking in objection,

Was in attendance to support the residents of St Marks who were concerned that the change of use would have a detrimental effect on the neighbourhood with regards to the increased vehicles, parking issues, noise disturbances and highways safety. She highlighted that nearby residents had experienced anti social behaviour from 22 Libertus Road which was also an HMO and so had concerns that the same problems would be experienced at number 35.

With regards to the comments from the joint waste team, she felt it wise to have an area that restricts parking to allow crews to pull up safely and empty the bins, however, felt that this would exacerbate the parking problems. She questioned the highway’s officers comments that there were 48 available parking spaces within a 200 metre radius of the proposed development site and noted that on street parking was residents only after 8pm. She highlighted that current residents already had issues with parking and were often forced to park on adjacent roads. In her opinion, there appeared to be mixed messages regarding the future tenants and the exact number of occupants. She also sought further clarification on the highways issues and felt that the highways officers need to  revisit the site to determine the number of on-street parking spaces over a longer period of time. She suggested that the committee refuse the application or at least defer until answers were sought to residents questions.

Member debate

RW: Had significant concerns about the application, particularly with regards to how narrow the street was and the fact that parking in this area was already heavily restricted due to the recent scheme introduced in an attempt to control car parking around train station. He felt that the scheme would inevitably result in more parking on the road as the parking provisions were insufficient for the number of residents expected.  He agreed with Councillor Holliday that more work was required to demonstrate that parking wasn’t going to be a significant problem. 

DS: Queried when a HMO becomes a block of flats and what the difference was between them. 

BF: Had concerns that they would have no control over whether 13 people actually lived in the HMO. He questioned whether they could limit the number of people who resided there.

MC:  He noted that there were 2 parking spaces close to the refuse store and questioned whether  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Planning Application Documents

Officer introduction

DO introduced the application, he informed the committee that the proposed works were for four wireless receivers/transmitter boxes which were to be affixed to the exterior rear elevation of the lift shaft on the roof of the Municipal Offices. He explained that the boxes were 5 x 7 metres long and 2 inches deep.

Vote of officer recommendation to permit

13 For (unanimous)

PERMIT

The committee is recommended to approve the following resolution:-

“That in accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraph  3 and 5, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

Paragraph 3; Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular

person (including the authority holding that information)

Paragraph 5; Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings

RESOLVED THAT

In accordance with Section 100A(4) Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the remaining agenda items as it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public are present there will be disclosed to them exempt information as defined in paragraph 3 and 5, Part (1) Schedule (12A) Local Government Act 1972, namely:

Paragraph 3; Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular

person (including the authority holding that information).

Paragraph 5; Information in respect of which a claim to legal professional privilege could be maintained in legal proceedings.

To approve the exempt minutes of the meeting held on 20^th June 2019.

The exempt minutes of the meeting held on the 20^th June 2019 were signed and approved as a correct record.