Documents
This Area currently logs representations made on recent planning applications (latest on top) , it does not necessarily include all representations made as some are handwritten. You will also find our latest AGM documentation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D Incoll
CEO
South Hams District Council
Dear Sir
Planning Applications 61/1630/10 - 1637/10
I am writing with concern for the way the AONB requirements as set out
in your Development Control Core Policies DC19 and DC20 are seemingly
repeatedly ignored in resolving planning applications.
We have asked for a long time now for the AONB team to be actively
included in the statutory authorities (as the Highway authority, etc.)
when reviewing planning applications within the AONB. At least such
applications in or adjacent to the AONB should be considered by the
full Development Control Committee, not just only by a planning officer.
An effective management system will include procedures to implement
requirements defined in the DC Core Policies such as those outlined
above. The applications above highlight the short comings in your
procedures.
In 2007 the new owner of this farm applied for planning permission for
a large (893 sq M) agricultural building in quite a prominent green
field just inside the AONB. The building was approved under delegated
powers.
In the summer of 2008 applications for initially two, later three,
more buildings with a total floor space of 1384 sq M on the same site
prompted a visit by the Council's Landscape Officer. The first
building had by then been erected. His report made it clear that he
was horrified at its impact on a sensitive area and was inclined to
recommend refusal of any further buildings. The three buildings were
approved, again under delegated powers.
In the autumn of 2009 applications for a further two buildings (987 sq
M) were submitted with almost no reference to the landscape or AONB.
These were again approved under delegated powers despite several
letters of objection that they should go to the full Development
Control Committee. This took the total floor area to 3266 sq M. So now
the blot on the AONB landscape is pretty gross. It is particularly
visible across the Avon valley from say Blackdown Rings.
Applications for a further seven buildings (2494 sqM) have now been
submitted. If approved they will take the floor area of this
"farmstead" to 5760 sq M all in the AONB and the Development Control
Committee seemingly never involved.
I would be grateful to have a positive response from you regarding a
change in your procedures to actively be seen to be implementing your
own defined requirements as set out in your LDF Core Policies.
Yours faithfully
A J Watling
South Hams Society
The Drey
Beadon Road
Salcombe
TQ8 8JT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EA re S Efford (76.8 KB) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 6 July 2010 17:16:11 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 28/0956/10/O
Site Address: Cookworthy Road, Tescos Site, Kingsbridge, TQ7 1QN
Case Officer: Mr Malcolm Elliott
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The Society strongly objects to this application.
Tesco accepted the conditions with the original outline application, 28/2431/06/O, but have started development work on site without fulfilling Condition 11.
Tesco are therefore in clear breach of the approval conditions and the application must be refused.
John Chalmers
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The society has on several occasions complained about the continuing
damage to the visual environment and the risk to river water quality
caused by activity at Riverside Farm. It asks that this application be
refused.
The site is in a very prominent place within the South Devon AONB and
the proposal would clearly not comply with the adopted policies for the
protection of the landscape. Furthermore, the application does not
appear to be supported by any independent commercial, technical or
environmental appraisal of the project for which the building is now
said to be needed.
The enforcement notice requiring demolition of the building was upheld
at appeal some two and a half years ago. The society hopes that it will
be pursued without further delay.
John Graham
Secretary, The South Hams Society,
The Church House,
Woodleigh,
Kingsbridge
TQ7 4DG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHS Repn Site Allocns DPD--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Address: Broadley Farm, Diptford, Totnes TQ9 7NJ
Case Officer: Mr George Allpress
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The Society acknowledges the limited contribution that wind turbines
can make to reducing carbon emissions although it considers that the
case for them is often overstated. They can be considerable intrusions
in the landscape and proposals for them within the AONB in general
should be unacceptable. This proposal fails on several grounds.
This proposed wind turbine is in a sensitive part of the AONB running
up the River Avon. We accept that some views of the turbine from the
river are restricted due to the topography and screening by the woods
in the valley. But other views especially from locations to the north-
east will show the turbine clearly. The photomontages seek to minimise
these and are not an adequate representation of the issue.
Depending upon what source is used wind speeds are below or near the
minimum for efficient performance and this makes the case less
attractive.
Despite the often repeated mantra that there is "no precedent in
planning legislation and each case is determined on it's own merits"
there is a powerful need for consistency in determining applications.
In this case approval of the application would be likely to generate
further applications for turbines in the AONB which would be difficult
to refuse. The result would be a significant loss of the landscape
attraction which brings so many visitors to the South Hams forming a
mainstay of the economy.
SHDC needs a general policy to issue public guidance and cover their
approach to planning decisions on domestic wind turbines particularly
where they are proposed to be sited within the AONB. This should be
formulated in collaboration with the AONB. The Society believe that
this policy should state that in general wind turbines are not
acceptable within the AONB and thus uphold Policy CS9 of the adopted
LDF Core Strategy.
John Chalmers
Chairman
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tesco Meeting Notes--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Address: Industrial Trading Estate, Poplar Drive, Kingsbridge
The South Hams Society objects to this application on the grounds that
a second supermarket in Kingsbridge will seriously damage the
financial viability of many Fore Street local retail traders in these
hard times. The site is outside the town centre and customers will be
able to drive in, park their cars, shop and leave without ever
visiting Fore Street - indeed access to Fore Street is so difficult
that few will attempt it.
The effects will not only be confined to the traders themselves but
also their suppliers and the contractors who provide them with
services and goods. The effect as a whole in these difficult times
will have a severe impact on the local economy - and indeed on the
Council's income from business rates.
The advent of Morrisons has improved the situation for shoppers to the
extent that a new large supermarket is unnecessary. However a small
supermarket outlet in Fore Street would be a useful addition to local
facilities.
If not used for employment land the supermarket site would be an
attractive brown-field site for affordable housing being near the town
centre and employment areas.
The Society strongly urges that this application should be refused.
John Chalmers
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Address:
Land adjacent to Charnwood,
Malborough,
Kingsbridge,
TQ7
3RR
Case Officer: Mr Malcolm Elliott
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The South Hams Society supports this application which provides
affordable housing without the burden of unnecessary open market
housing to subsidise it, albeit at the cost of commuting to centres of
employment.
However there are some concerns about traffic and the lack of
pedestrian access to the site. These might be addressed by local
widening of the road (including the stretch alongside the allotments)
and a crossing to provide pedestrian access to and from the town
through the churchyard. The housing layout appears to be able to
accommodate this.
The Society suggests that the application be approved subject to
conditions in these areas.
John Chalmers
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AGM Agenda & Accounts--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AGM Agenda 2010 Poster--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David Incoll
Sent: 10 February 2010 08:33
To: 'John Chalmers'
Cc: Lee Bray
Subject: RE: Housing Site Allocations
Dear Mr Chalmers
thank you for your letter.
Clearly our actions have to address a whole range of issues and timescales, including the statutory duties imposed on us, the very real need to address the issue of affordable housing in a way that is going to deliver results ,public consultation( in respect of which we went far beyond the normal rules and engagedd the Prince's Foundation Trust ) and a further range of material considerations.
I am copying this to Lee Bray,our Head of Service, to provide a full response. There will ,I regret be some delay, as he is currently off sick with Swine Flu
Yours sincerely
David Incoll
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 17 Feb 2010, at 14:04, Lee Bray wrote:
Dear Mr Chalmers,
Further to our Chief Executive's reply to you last week (and with my apologies for the delay in my replying further, swine flu having intervened!), may I add my thanks to his for your input. I understand the strength of your feelings in this matter. I hope that you would, however, agree that the Council was right to go beyond the basic steps required by government in LDF guidance.
The 2 month consultation last May/June went beyond those requirements, as did the STA process (a significant step beyond the government's SHLAA requirements - please forgive the acronyms - I think you are familiar with them). Bringing in the Prince's Foundation added yet a further design dimension and enabled additional community engagement. Most recently, we have reconsulted in several communities where we felt issues remained - Salcombe being one of these. Our aim truly is to find the right solution in each place.
Delivering affordable homes is always difficult, and that is particularly so in the present economic climate. However, the plans we are preparing are intended to carry us forward for many years and we are aiming for a sound and robust foundation which will endure and serve us all well in spite of social, economic and political change.
For the record, since you refer to other places - In West Alvington the site for 50 houses was first raised by a WA parish councillor at the Kingsbridge EbD workshop. It was not a site initially promoted by the District Council. In Modbury, the alternatives put forward were variously acknowledged and have been investigated. We have carried out further engagement in both these places (and others) as we seek to discern the best way forward in each case.
You also refer to timescales, infrastructure provision and biodiversity requirements. In each case we have again gone beyond the basic government requirement.
I am not seeking to change your mind as to whether or not such things are important. On the contrary, the Council also believes that they are, and we hope that the approach we have taken will enable much more evidence to be gathered than would otherwise have been possible. In due course all of this will, of course, be put before an inspector. We hope that the range of evidence available will help him (or her) to come to sound conclusions.
Finally, and solely for the purpose of clarification, may I ask whether you wish your letter of 9th February to be treated as a comment on the recent consultation and, if so, whether it represents the view of the South Hams Society or your own views as Society Chairman. We shall be pleased to treat it as a comment either way, but wish to be clear of your intent since the letter is addressed to the Chief Executive.
Thank you again.
Yours sincerely,
Lee Bray
Head of Community Regeneration
South Hams District Council
01803 861292
lee.bray@southhams.gov.uk
P.S. I am copying this reply to the same District Councillors as those you had copied your original letter to. I do not have email addresses to hand for Gary Streeter, Anthony Steen or Robin Hogg.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers [mailto:john@croftroad.eclipse.co.uk]
Sent: 19 February 2010 11:18
To: Lee Bray
Cc: Robin Hogg; Paul Coulson; Cllr Carter; Cllr R. Tucker; Cllr Gilbert; Cllr Howarth; Julian Brazil DCC
Subject: Housing Site Allocations
Dear Mr Bray
Thank you for your reply to my letter to Mr Incoll. I hope you are now recovered. I must accept that you aim to find the right solution in each place but to convince the residents of the South Hams you must be seen to be responding to their rightful concerns about their environment. If the forward planning proposals are taken unchanged to publication stage and beyond the communities will consider that local democracy has not worked and further action must be taken.
I will reply briefly to the other points you raise.
As far as the SHLAA is concerned Robin Hogg's letters to Mr Incoll and Mr Swiss (both of which I believe remain unacknowledged as well as unanswered) suggests some deficiencies notably in the lack of attention to small brown-field sites within development boundaries which can make a significant contribution to targets. Whether consultation went far enough is best judged by results and we know that for most of the population of South Hams your site allocations came as a surprise - usually unpleasant. Graham Swiss and James Doxford should be able to vouch for this from their experiences at Salcombe, Modbury and West Alvington.
As for the STAs they are still marked "draft" and contain conspicuous errors, for example, how is it that site 3 in Salcombe is marked with the same biodiversity grade as all the other sites in Salcombe (even including the car park) despite being a County Wildlife Site and a habitat for two protected species which none of the other sites are? We understand this arose because the GIS used by the planners mistakenly did not contain the overlay with this information. There are many other such defects in all the STAs we have seen. So although we agree that STA might be a useful tool, it is only so if completed correctly.
As for the Prince's Foundation it was clear to the attendees of the EbD workshops that the recommendations that came in the report paid very little attention to the views expressed by the residents. For example the site chosen in Malborough was against the clearly expressed wishes not only of the representatives of the village but everyone else in the workshop. The planners overrode local knowledge with their ideas of Place-Making, etc.
Again there is no information on the Strategic Infrastructure Delivery yet it is often crucial to the choice of a site. For example the site chosen in Salcombe, Modbury and W Alvington all generate access and traffic problems which can only be solved by highway upgrades on a large scale - not to speak of the demolition of buildings. It has also become apparent that the AONB has not been consulted for their views before the sites were chosen.
In West Alvington what ever the opinion of a individual Councillor, the Parish Council and residents did agree on a site which was available at no cost and informed you of it. Similarly the secretary of the Modbury Town Council confirmed that the Council wrote to SHDC last year asking for the use of infill sites but did not even get an acknowledgement.
It is my belief that the forward planning process has been conducted too hastily to provide proper consultation and the attention to detail that small sites require. So to meet the timescale self imposed by the Council large green field sites were chosen as the easiest option in the hope that large contractors can be attracted to develop them and in the process provide a percentage of affordable housing.
But this approach is very damaging both to the country side and to the towns and villages in the South Hams. All agree that we need more affordable housing as well as employment sites but we do not need more open market housing which is likely to end up as second homes. The affordable housing obtained by the development of a large green-field site by a large contractor is now down to 25% of the total houses built - Lee Mill and Sherford demonstrate this and no better prediction can be made for the future.
So are we to build four times the number of houses required to get the affordable houses specified in the Core Strategy? That means 800 in Kingsbridge and Dartmouth and 200 in Local Centres such as Salcombe and Modbury. Are our towns and villages to become victims of the desire of developers to make a profit? Where will it stop?
We must find another strategy and it must be the careful selection of smaller sites, the use of all available brown-field sites and those within the town boundary. Coming to the community with open minds will help you find them just as W Alvington and Modbury did. Robin Hogg's idea of village exception sites will help. Small sites developed by local builders within the existing infrastructure will contribute. Housing trusts such the Guinness Trust can be approached. The Hastoe Housing Association who are applying for permission for 17 affordable houses at Malborough will save that village from large numbers of unwanted open market houses.
These are not grand visions but they are a robust and flexible method of achieving results so that the character of villages and towns that have grown up through the centuries is respected.
Lastly you asked if I wished my letter to be treated as a comment on the consultation and the answer is yes, I do and I would also like this letter to be treated similarly. You also asked whether it represents the views of the South Hams Society and again the answer is yes - the committee asked me to write it and I would not have signed it as chairman if it had been otherwise.
Yours sincerely
John Chalmers
Chairman
South Hams Society
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Lee Bray"
Date: 22 February 2010 12:09:21 GMT
To: "John Chalmers" Cc: "Robin Hogg", "Paul Coulson", "Cllr Carter", "Cllr R. Tucker", "Cllr Gilbert", "Cllr Howarth", "Julian Brazil
DCC" Subject: RE: Housing Site Allocations
Dear Mr Chalmers,
Thank you for your further comments.
I will ensure that they are, together with your earlier ones, treated as comments of the South Hams Society on the plans.
Yours sincerely,
Lee Bray
Head of Community Regeneration
South Hams District Council
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read the Society's views on South Hams District Council's forward plans for the Housing Site Allocation Local Development Framework by going to documents below. The South Devon Branch of the CPRE has written to SHDC on this subject in a similar vein and you can obtain copies from Robin Hogg.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Campaign to oppose development of harbour-side fields in Salcombe:
Headline critique of the site options
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Peters
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 6:13 PM
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 43/1946/09/F
Site Address: St Martins Church, Sherford Down Road to Sherford Cross, Sherford, Devon,
Case Officer: David Kenyon
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
As a member of the South Hams Society Committee and a community representative on the AONB Committee, I wish to point out that the letter by Mr.Chalmers was sent on the understanding that the proposal lies within the AONB boundary which is clearly not the case and I did not see the letter before it was sent.
Bearing in mind the importance of continuing use of our rural churches and the burden of repair that falls on a small part of the community viz the congregation, I would point out that every consideration should be given to maintaining easy use if such buildings are not to fall into disuse. I am sure that English Heritage would not wish to have the additional burden of deciding on the outcome of redundant churches such as this might become. If we are to maintain our landscape and these important buildings in it, more consideration needs to be given to how rural churches may be used. This involves greater ease of access to bring in outside funds. This car park is being supplied free of charge to the local community. The blending of the car park at Modbury Church is a good example. Concerts and other community use is now easier to organise. I do hope that such community values will be considered.
John C Peters
Higher Stadbury
Aveton Gifford
Kingsbridge,
Devon.
TQ7 4PD.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers john@croftroad.eclipse.co.uk
Date: 12 December 2009 13:37:06 GMT
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Cc: John Peters higherstadbury@googlemail.com
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 43/1946/09/F
Site Address: St Martins Church, Sherford Down Road to Sherford Cross, Sherford, Devon,
Case Officer: David Kenyon
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
And now I must make a second correction to my previous letters on this application. It has been pointed out to me that the site is not within the AONB. However the Site Map shows that it is within the Area of Great Landscape Value, the car park must damage the rural setting of the village and a judgement must be made as to whether the benefits exceed the damage.
I would be glad to have some guidance on the current status of Areas of Great Landscape Value.
My apologies to the applicant.
John Chalmers
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers john@croftroad.eclipse.co.uk
Date: 8 December 2009 11:54:52 GMT
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 43/1946/09/F
Site Address: St Martins Church, Sherford Down Road to Sherford Cross, Sherford, Devon,
Case Officer: David Kenyon
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
I must correct my letter of 2nd December was wrong in saying that no consideration had been given to use of the alternatives. The Design and Access Statement makes it clear that use of the village hall car park has been considered.
However I must maintain the Society's opposition to this application. Development in the AONB outside Development Boundaries should only be permitted when there are overriding social benefits. The village hall car park is just across the road from the church's rear entrance so the distance from it to the church is no more than would be covered by those parking in the proposed car park. The Design and Access Statement implies that it is normal usage to drop off those who cannot manage the steps to the rear entrance, at the front of the church.
The congregation is estimated at between 10 and 30 with as many cars as people. In these carbon-conscious times this seems excessive and the congregation must share cars at present.
John Chalmers
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site Address: Old Cotmore Farm, Cotmore, Chillington, Kingsbridge, TQ7 2LR
Case Officer: David Kenyon
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
In addition to the reasons for refusal of this application put forward by John Watling the Society would like to add that it would result in the loss of a traditional tourism facility that has the great advantage of having no adverse impact on the AONB during the winter months when the site is most visible.
John Chalmers
South Hams Society
9 Croft Road
Salcombe TQ8 8DZ
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A6076CH Comment on application 53/1976/09/F
Site Address: Old Cotmore Farm, Cotmore, Chillington, Kingsbridge, TQ7
2LR
Case Officer: David Kenyon
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
This site is within the South Devon AONB and the conversion of a caravan and camping site for limited seasonal use into a development of permanent two storey holiday lodges contravenes the requirements of Policy C4 of the Devon Structure Plan which states that that "development will only be permitted where it would support the conservation or enhancement of the area" and Policy CS9 of the Adopted LDF Core Strategy which states that "conservation and enhancement will be given great weight" within the AONB.
The development is outside development boundaries and therefore is not consistent with Policy CS12 Tourism of the adopted LDF Core Strategy which seeks to centre tourist facilities within town centres and development boundaries.
These policies are not compatible with the development proposed which, if approved, would encourage similar proposals in the undeveloped AONB. We urge SHDC to implement its own requirements as above and refuse this application.
John Watling
South Hams Society
The Drey
Beadon Road
Salcombe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 43/1917/09/F
From: john@croftroad.eclipse.co.uk
Date: 2 December 2009 16:24:29 GMT
To: development.control@southhams.gov.ukSite Address: Site off Mill Lane, Frogmore, Devon, TQ7 2NZ
Case Officer: Jenny Draper
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The purposes of the building in this application are ill-defined. It is not an agricultural building in the normal sense as it is not attached to a farm. It appears to be an 8 horse livery stable but could be equally used for many other commercial purposes which may have undesirable effects on traffic and neigbours.
We suggest that a better case must be made for building on pasture land in the AONB outside the development boundary and this application should be refused.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 43/1917/09/F
From: john@croftroad.eclipse.co.uk
Date: 2 December 2009 16:24:29 GMT
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Site Address: Site off Mill Lane, Frogmore, Devon, TQ7 2NZ
Case Officer: Jenny Draper
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The purposes of the building in this application are ill-defined. It is not an agricultural building in the
normal sense as it is not attached to a farm. It appears to be an 8 horse livery stable but could be equally
used for many other commercial purposes which may have undesirable effects on traffic and neigbours.
We suggest that a better case must be made for building on pasture land in the AONB outside the
development boundary and this application should be refused.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 37/1944/09/F
From: john@croftroad.eclipse.co.uk
Date: 2 December 2009 17:35:04 GMT
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Site Address: Land opposite 60 Noss Mayo, Pillory Hill, Devon, PL8 1ED
Case Officer: Kati Owen
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The proposed 3 storey house would dominate this section of the foreshore and obliterate the cottages
behind it. It's position on a restricted plot right on the creek foreshore of Noss Mayo deserves particularly
careful consideration. The application provides very little information on it's context and the effect on
neigbours and is inadequate to provide a good basis for a decision.
We suggest that the applicant should be asked to resubmit the application and to include in the
documentation photomontages of views from across the creek and of both sides from Pillory Hill as well
as drawings showing the positions of neigbouring houses, the heights of roof ridges and eaves, car
parking and access to the site. We suggest that a site inspection should be made by members of the
Development Control Committee.
If planning approval is given it should be subject to conditions which will protect the natural environment
of the creek during construction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 20 July 2009 17:04:25 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 41/1099/09/F
Site Address: The Bothy, Church Street, Salcombe, TQ8 8DH
Case Officer: George Allpress
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The Society objects to the loss of employment accommodation in this application especially as the employment concerned is part of Salcombe's boat building tradition.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 28 July 2009 09:54:21 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 41/1102/09/F
Site Address: Long Park, Higher Batson, Salcombe, TQ8 8NG
Case Officer: Kate Phillips
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The Society recommends that the conditions placed on the original permission, 41/0865/04/F should also be applied to any new permission.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 3 September 2009 12:15:43 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 37/1449/09/F
Site Address: Charnwood, Stoke Road, Noss Mayo, Devon, PL8 1DY
Case Officer: Lucy Hall
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The Society objects to this application on the grounds of increased light pollution caused by the considerably increased area of glazing on the elevation facing the estuary.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 3 September 2009 12:20:52 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 53/1434/09/RM
Site Address: New Development site rear of Penn Cottage, Shindle Park, Chillington, Devon,
Case Officer: David Kenyon
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
Because of the major changes from 13 terraced houses to 7 detached houses the Society considers that this should be treated as a new application not a reserved matters application.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 3 September 2009 13:47:53 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 29/1242/09/F
Site Address: The Paddock, Kingston, Kingsbridge, TQ7 4PU
Case Officer: Kate Phillips
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
This application for a garage is outside the development boundary of the village and the Society believes on these grounds it ought to be refused.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 3 September 2009 14:26:34 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 41/1308/09/AD
Site Address: South Sands Hotel, Bolthead, Salcombe, TQ8 8LL
Case Officer: Debbie Crowther
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
The Society objects to the illuminated signage on the rear entrance on the grounds of increased light pollution of the estuary.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Chalmers
Date: 8 September 2009 19:59:15 BST
To: development.control@southhams.gov.uk
Subject: A6076CH Comment on application 41/1405/09/F
Site Address: Batson Hall Cottage, Shadycombe Road, Salcombe, Devon, TQ8 8NE
Case Officer: George Allpress
Type your comments here, please include your name and postal address...
This application proposes use of the Cyder Pound as a boat store on the ground floor and as an office on the first floor. Its use as a boat store must be questionable as the doors on the front wall open directly onto a steep hill near two blind corners some distance from the head of the creek. Moving boats in and out of the store will be difficult and hazardous as the narrow lane will make it necessary to stop all traffic while the operation is carried out. In addition the space for storage of boats is very limited by the position of the large cog wheel in the middle of the space.
The use of the first floor as offices can also be questioned. The natural lighting will be inadequate and neither the Design and Access Statement or the drawings indicate provision of electrical services. There also appears to be a glazed panel in the middle of the floor above the cog wheel.
The absence of credible utility of the building as proposed makes it hard to avoid the conclusion that there is some hidden agenda for other uses such as ancillary accommodation later. Planning permission could not be refused on these grounds but if it is granted the Society suggests that permitted development rights should be withdrawn specifically to prevent the Cyder Pound being used as ancillary accommodation to conform with the view expressed in Mr Elliott's letter dated October 1997.
However there are other significant reasons why this application should be refused on the grounds of internal inconsistencies. Specifically:
the Design and Access Statement refers to a toilet on the ground floor and none is shown on the drawings,
the Design and Access Statement refers to a slate roof while drawings show a corrugated metal roof,
the Design and Access Statement says that all the cider making machinery will be kept but the drawings show only the press and large cog wheel retained while there are a number of smaller wheels, axles and beams in the existing building which are not accommodated in the drawn proposals and two tanks are shown as removed.
These inconsistencies must be resolved before the application can be considered.
Finally the Local Plan 1989 to 2001 which has been saved until the LDF is completed and approved states that "In view of its extremely sensitive nature development at Batson could only be permitted in very exceptional circumstances". This application cannot be considered to qualify as presenting exceptional circumstances. The approved LDF Core Strategy also emphasises the need to conserve and enhance historic architecture in Objective SO 20 and Policy CS 9(4).
For all these reasons the Society strongly recommends that this application should be refused.
Home | About | Join | Events | Documents | Weblog | Links | Contact
