Decisions

RESOLVED that it being 11.29 am the meeting be adjourned for a comfort break and reconvene at 11.36 a.m.

Councillor Hunt declared a prejudicial interest in the above application and left the meeting.

The Committee considered a report by the Planning Officer (BC) (circulated previously).

RESOLVED (unanimous) that the application be APPROVED as recommended by the Planning Officer.

The Committee considered a report by the Lead Planning Officer (circulated previously).

The Lead Planning Officer advised of the following corrections to be made to the committee report:

·       The area of land edged in blue on the plan showing the site allocation was in the control of the applicant Barwood however it did not form part of this planning application.

·       Section 106 Agreement Heads of Terms and Viability – paragraph 12.3, reference to the “Serviced Primary School site” should state “1.8 hectare” as Devon County Council had requested a total of 1.8 hectare (1.3ha and 0.5ha for expansion) for the new primary school site.

The Lead Planning Officer advised that Matt Collins, Devon County Council Highways Officer was in attendance.

Nick Mathews (representing the applicant) addressed the Committee.

Sue Petters (Assistant Town Clerk for Barnstaple Town Council) advised that Rob Ward was unable to attend and confirmed that she did not wish to address the Committee.

In response to questions, the Lead Planning Officer advised the following:

·       It was proposed that the viability of the scheme would be reviewed half way through the construction of the development.  If the target sales within the viability assessment were exceeded then it was anticipated that a share of the profit would be used to deliver additional affordable housing.  There would not be a “downward review” in relation to the provision of affordable housing and the minimum number of affordable housing units delivered on the site would be 82.

·       The Park and Change parking areas could be used more flexibly for onward travel such as for public transport or traveling by bike to onward destinations.

·       The construction of a new primary school would form part of the phasing plan.  The community hub was at the heart of the scheme, however the key spine road needed to be constructed and survey works for the school needed to undertaken prior to construction works commencing on the new primary school. There would be a quantum of housing delivered first and the school would be delivered at the earliest point in the scheme.

·       Devon County Council Public Health had requested a financial contribution towards the expansion of the existing medical centre provision in the town.  It would not be used for the provision of a new facility. This financial contribution would be released to the NHS at the earliest opportunity.  The Council would work with the NHS in relation to the drafting of the section 106 agreement to tie the financial contribution to a particular scheme.

·       There was no local plan policy in relation to the occupancy of dwellings.

·       The Housing Infrastructure Fund would enable an additional 3% affordable housing units to be provided as part of the development.

·       The community hub would be provided by the developer.  If it could not be provided then section 106 financial contributions would be sought.

·       Due to the uncertainty of the access road being provided through the park, the masterplan would secure a secondary road which would terminate at the boundary and would be aligned to the proposed accesses shown on the adjoining development site. This would allow for the roads to be linked in the future.  There were limited points on the site that the secondary road could be provided to ensure onward connectivity. Devon County Council had recommended that conditions be included regarding points of access to the boundary of the site.

·       Devon County Council Children’s Services in their consultation response dated 21 January 2019 advised that the Barnstaple primary school provision was now at capacity across the entire town.  Orchard Vale primary school was at capacity.  The primary school provision was likely to attract pupils from the Landkey and areas nearby.

·       There was no planning policy on self build properties and it did not form part of this scheme.

·       If the application was refused it would have a significant impact on the 5 year housing land supply. The development was ready to be delivered and the scheme included a phasing plan.  The developer would commence the scheme in 12 months and the Council was seeking an early delivery within the next 2 years.  80 housing units would be provided per annum and would be a significant contribution to the 5 year housing land supply.

In response to questions, Matt Collins, Devon County Council Highways Officer advised the following:

·       The Park and Exchange would be used mainly for parking.  Devon County Council would wish to secure the management arrangements for this site, which would include the management of the site and arrangements for charging.

·       Devon County Council would be working with the bus company and initially 1 new bus service would be provided which would be increased to 2 as the number of houses increased on the development.

·       There was a potential for people travelling to Barnstaple from the South Molton side of town to use the Park and Change facility.

·       The Park and Change facility would remove a small number of vehicle movements from the South Molton/Landkey direction traveling through the town centre.

In response to questions, the Service Manager (Development Management) advised the following:

·       The current Joint Local Plan did not include self build, however the Council was taking the housing crisis seriously and considering what actions could be taken.  These would be considered as part of the review of the Joint Local Plan.

RESOLVED (unanimous) that the application be APPROVED as recommended by the Lead Planning Officer.

The Committee requested that a letter be sent to the Government expressing its concerns regarding the current housing crisis.

Councillor Prowse declared a prejudicial interest in the above application and left the meeting.

The Committee considered a report by the Senior Planning Officer (circulated previously).

RESOLVED that the meeting be adjourned for 2 minutes to enable the officer to obtain a glass of water.

RESOLVED that the meeting be reconvened.

The Senior Corporate and Community Services Officer read out 2 statements received from Cathie Hamilton and Sue Prosper, Love Braunton (objectors) to the Committee.

Ruth McDonough (objector), Gary Baddick (applicant) and Robert Cocker (agent) addressed the Committee.

In response to questions, the Senior Planning officer advised the following:

·       The Highways Officer from Devon County Council was unable to attend the meeting.

·       The Lawful Development Certificate had been approved which lawfully permitted the movement of vehicles from the site.

·       If the application was refused and challenged at appeal, it was likely that the appeal would be lost as the Lawful Development Certificated has been granted.

·       Details of the materials had now been provided and included within the report. The conditions had been amended to reflect the change in materials.

·       Overhead power cables was a matter for consideration by the developer and the applicant would be required to liaise with the appropriate utility provider.

·       The scheme was of a modern design. It was considered that the visual impact would not be harmful to the character of the locality.

·       The transport assessment detailed the number of vehicle movements which had been agreed.

·       The dispute regarding the joint party boundary hedge was a civil matter.

In response to questions, the Senior Solicitor and Monitoring Officer advised the following:

·       The liability to and payment of Business Rates and Council Tax were useful indicators but were not determining factors in the consideration of applications for Lawful Development Certificates. The major consideration was the evidence provided as to the established use of the land.

·       Lawful Development Certificates could be revoked however this was only in rare circumstances if it became clear that the evidence that had been presented was false.

·       The evidence that had been presented was for the storage of materials.

In response to questions, the Lead Planning Officer (MB) advised the following:

·       That the site was within the development boundary of Braunton.

·       It was considered that the application was acceptable in terms of the visual impact, scale, Planning Policy DM04 and the National Planning Policy Framework as detailed in the report.

RESOLVED (6 for, 3 against and 1 abstained) that the application be APPROVED as recommended by the Senior Planning Officer.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 11 August 2021 (circulated previously) be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair subject to reference to “The Ward Members (Councillor L. Spear, Councillor D. Spear and Councillor Chesters) addressed the Committee” in minute 42 being amended to the following:

“The Ward Members for Braunton East Councillors L and D Spear and for Braunton West and Georgeham Councillor Chesters addressed the Committee”.

The Chief Executive advised the Committee that Devon County Council was currently undertaking consultation on the proposed changes to the North Devon Link Services and that the consultation was due to close shortly.  He advised the Committee of the following:

·       Devon County Council provided North Devon Link Service centres in Bideford, Holsworthy, Ilfracombe and Barnstaple.  Since the beginning of the Coronavirus pandemic, these centres had been closed.

·       The consultation proposed that the service was redesigned from a buildings based service to one that works with people in their community to address their needs and enable them to live as independently as possible.

·       The consultation was primarily targeted at individuals who used the service.

·       The consultation had gained a lot publicity.

·       It was suggested that Members may wish to submit their own response as part of the consultation.

RESOLVED that the Chief Executive be instructed to write to Devon County Council:

(a)  objecting to the changes proposed to the North Devon Link Service highlighting that the physical centres had provided a lifeline during the Coronavirus pandemic and that the closure was counterproductive on the health and Police services; and

(b)  requesting that the matter be referred to the Devon County Council Health and Wellbeing Committee for consideration.

The Committee considered a report by the Chief Executive (circulated previously) regarding housing issues within North Devon.

The Committee had a brief discussion regarding the difficulties currently being faced by individuals and families seeking accommodation, issues around the current housing crisis and potential actions that the Council could take as a Local Authority. The housing crisis also had an impact on the tourism and hospitality sector as staff had nowhere to live.

The Chief Executive advised that the Devon District Forum was in the process of formulating a paper to be sent to all Devon MP’s next week. This paper would include the impact on the local economy. Some businesses had indicated that they would be seeking to relocate as they could not provide accommodation for staff.

In response to questions, the Chief Executive advised:

·       The Council did not have a housing revenue account as it did not have a housing stock.  The maximum number of properties that the Council could own was 200.

·       An informal meeting of the Policy Development was in the process of being arranged on a date in October 2021. It was suggested that the Panel consist of members of the Policy Development Committee, Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council and the Lead Member for Housing. Other Members could also attend.  A report would then be presented to either the Policy Development Committee or Strategy and Resources Committee and then on to full Council.

RESOLVED that the Council hold an informal Panel meeting by the end of October 2021, inviting relevant organisations and individuals to make representations, with a view to preparing a set of actions and recommendations.

The Committee considered a report by the Director of Resources and Deputy Chief Executive (circulated previously) regarding the Performance and Financial Management for Quarter 1 of 2021/22.

The Accountancy Services Manager highlighted the following:

·       The revenue budget for 2021/22 was approved at Council on 24th February 2021 at £13,639,000.

·       As at 30 June 2021, the latest forecast net budget was £13,630,000, which produced a forecast budget surplus of £9,000. Details were shown in “Appendix A – Variations in the Revenue Budget”

·       There was still pressure on the 2021/22 budget due to the Covid-19 pandemic with continued additional costs being incurred and forecast decline in core income sources.

·       Included within the approved budget a government grant had been factored in relation to Covid-19 pressures of £536,710 and also budgeted for £375,000 of additional costs and reduced income, these had already been incorporated into Appendix A along with the latest forecast for each service area.

·       The grant of £536,710 had been approved and received and it was also anticipated that £80,000 re-imbursement would be received for Quarter 1 loss of Sales, Fees and charges, from the continued Government 75% income reimbursement scheme. This was an estimate as the scheme was extended to include the period April to June 2021 only.

·       At the end of 2020/21 NDC placed £375,000 into a Covid Budget management reserve to help mitigate any further adverse variances due to the pandemic in 2021/22, this future protection was still available if required.

·       As at 31 March 2021 the Collection Fund reserve balance was £9,810,252.

·       “Appendix B – Movement in reserves and Balances” detailed the movements to and from earmarked reserves in 2021/22.

·       Full details of the Strategic Contingency Reserve movements and commitments were detailed in “Appendix C – Strategic Contingency Reserve”.

·       The 2021/22 Capital Programme was detailed in “Appendix D – Capital Programme 2021/22”.

·       The Budget and Financial Framework report to Full Council on 24 February 2021 outlined the Capital Programme for the 2021/22 financial year of £22,419,916. Project underspend of £917,121 were bought forward from 2020/21 year and further variations of £1,379,087 were approved as part of the performance and financial management report to Strategy and Resources Committee, to produce a revised 2021/22 Capital Programme of £24,716,124.

·       Overall variations of £99,978 proposed to the 2021/22 Capital Programme were detailed in paragraph 4.4.3 of the report.

·       The overall Capital Programme for 2021/22 to 2024/25 was £37,135,687 and detailed in paragraph 4.4.6 of the report.

·       The Programme of £37,135,687 was funded by Capital Receipts/Borrowing (£18,866,483), External Grants and Contributions (£16,042,616) and Reserves (£2,226,588).

·       Release of Funds for 2021/22 Capital Programme as detailed in paragraph 4.4.10 of the report.

·       Treasury Management as detailed in paragraph 4.5 of the report.

·       Debt Management as detailed in paragraph 4.6 of the report.

·       General Debtors as detailed in paragraph 4.7 of the report.

In response to questions, the Accountancy Services Manager advised the following:

·       The figures in red in Appendix A were better than forecast and the figures in black were worse than forecast.  The Car Parks Pay and Display income forecast was down by £225,000.

·       A breakdown of the figures in Appendix A would be circulated to the Committee.

·       The total surplus of £9,000 in Appendix A was the forecast for the whole of the financial year and took into account the additional Government grant which would be received for loss of sales, fees and charges.

·       The Accountant for the CCTV service was in the process of discussing the arrangements for the recovery of CCTV income with the Town Centre, Pannier Market and CCTV Manager.

·       Acquisition of corporate property £250,000 as detailed in Appendix D was for the acquisition of the property at Boutport Street as part of the High Street fund.

·       There was a slight reduction in the levels of collections of Business Rates and Council Tax, which was due to Covid 19. Following consultation with the Revenues and Benefits Manager he would provide Members with an update on the potential financial impact of Covid 19 on the collection of Business Rates and Council Tax on this year and future financial years.

·       Clarification would be sought from the Revenues and Benefits Manager regarding no write off for Quarter 1.  It was understood that there had been no write offs as there had been a change in the way that debts were being collected as a result of Covid 19.

In response to questions, the Chief Executive advised the following:

·       The vehicle contract would commence on 1 October 2021.

·       In relation to the reduction in car park income, the Government 75% income reimbursement scheme ended in June 2021.

The Committee thanked Officers for their hard work in achieving the current financial position.

RESOLVED:

(a)   That the actions being taken to ensure that performance was at the desired level be noted;

(b)   That the contributions to/from earmarked reserves be approved as detailed in section 4.2 of the report;

(c)   That the movement on the Strategic Contingency Reserve as detailed in section 4.3 of the report be noted.

(d)   That funds be released for the capital schemes listed in section 4.4.10 of the report;

(e)   That the sections dealing with Treasury Management (section 4.5 of the report), and Debt Management (sections 4.6 and 4.7 of the report) be noted.

RECOMMENDED:

(f)    That Council approve the variations to the Capital Programme 2021/22 to 2024/25 as detailed in section 4.4.3 of the report.

The Committee considered recommendation 5 from the Policy Development Committee on 27 May 2021 regarding the Dog Strategy and Litter Strategy.

The Committee noted that an item had been included on the agenda for the Policy Development Committee meeting on 9 September 2021 and it had been recommended that a Task Team be appointed to undertake a strategic review of the litter bin and dog bin strategy.

The Chief Executive advised the Committee that the Litter Working Group had already been set up and would be undertaking a strategic review of the litter bin and dog bin strategy and therefore there was no requirement to establish a separate task team.

RESOLVED that recommendation 5 from the Policy Development Committee on 27 May 2021 regarding the Dog Strategy and Litter Strategy be referred to the Litter Working Group for consideration.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 2 August 2021 (circulated previously) be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.