Agenda item

Planning Applications

To see Letters of Representation and further supplementary information relating to any of the Applications on the agenda, please select the following link and enter the relevant Planning Reference number:




The Committee considered the details of the planning applications prepared by the relevant Case Officers as presented in the agenda papers, and considered the comments of Town and Parish Councils, together with other representations received, which were listed within the presented agenda reports, and RESOLVED that:


6a)       3650/23/FUL   Land At Sx 782 623, Symonds Drive, Dartington

                                    Parish:  Dartington Parish Council


       Development:  Application for the erection of a single residential dwelling (Affordable Discount Market)


Case Officer Update:  The Case Officer summarised the key issues, namely that:


·         Discount to remain at 80% of open market rate.

·         Additional information submitted to confirm trees and biodiversity enhancements.


The Officer reported that this was policy compliant and would not ask for a viability study because the site was 30% compliant.  The open market value for this property was £450,000.


During the debate, one Member felt there was need to challenge large developers and £450K was not affordable and not meeting local housing needs.  Also felt it was wrong to approve this and would see further applications coming forward on spare pieces of land.  This was an ancient hamlet being flooded, over developed and not affordable.  Another Member felt garden sizes being reduced were acceptable within the JLP and this was infill housing.


Recommendation:                 Conditional approval subject to completion of  S106.


Committee decision:             Conditional approval subject to completion of S106.


Conditions:                             Standard time limit

                                                Accord with plans

                                                No additional openings

                                                Parking to be provided prior to occupation

Incidental use of garage

                                                Adherence to submitted lighting strategy

                                                Installation of EV charging point prior to occupation


6b)       3048/21/FUL   Montgo, Maudlin Road, Totnes, TQ9 5TG

                                    Town:  Totnes


   Development:  Provision of single dwelling house (resubmission of 1668/20/FUL)


Case Officer Update:  The Case Officer summarised the key issues, namely that:


·         Principle of development.

·         Design/scale/landscape.

·         Neighbour amenity.

·         Highways and parking.

·         Drainage.

·         Land stability.

·         Earlier refusal in 2020.


In response to questions raised, it was reported that: 

·         The Drainage Officer felt that the permeable paving was acceptable.

·         They would be requesting oversight for a practical solution for land stability.

·         The Totnes Town Council had been consulted on 4 occasions.


Having heard from speakers on behalf of the objector and the supporter, Members debated the application.  During the debate, one Member raised concerns on the impact on neighbouring properties and felt that it was important to respect local distinctiveness and maintaining local identity.  This site has the potential to be something wonderful and also felt that this was too big for the site, but they had dealt with the drainage and parking issues.  Another Member felt this was not overbearing and the site was not being used and would now provide housing.  It was also raised that the applicant had addressed the issues and therefore supported the officer’s decision.


Recommendation:                 Conditional Approval


Committee decision:             Conditional Approval to include a pre-commencement condition - a report on land stability to be approved by SHDC.


Conditions:                             1. Time limit

                                                2. Approved plans

                                                3. Land stabilisation details

                                                4. Site levels

                                                5. Construction management plan

                                                6. Construction environmental management plan

                                                7. Access, parking and drainage

                                                8. External materials

                                                9. Boundary treatments

                                                10.Landscaping scheme

                                                11.EV charging point

                                                12.Bin storage

                                                13.Surface and foul water drainage


                                                15.Unidentified contamination

                                                16.PD Removal          


6c)       3928/23/HHO Eldoret, Galmpton Cross, Galmpton, TQ7 3EH

                                    Parish:  South Huish


Development:  Householder application for demolition of outbuildings & single storey extension to East elevation. Creation of enclosed balcony to top of existing garage.


Case Officer Update:  The Case Officer summarised the key issues, namely:


·         Highly visible from the public realm due to countryside location, topography of landscape and lack of surrounding tree cover.

·         Extension was overbearing at 74m2 in footprint and 6.2m in height (300mm lower to ridge than previous two-storey proposal).

·         Ridge higher the eaves of the two-storey host dwelling despite being single storey.

·         Perception of a two-storey addition and rivals the primary of the parent dwelling.

·         Inharmonious design which does not sit well with parent dwelling in terms of size, scale and fenestration.

·         Excessive amount of glazing in this protected ‘dark skies’ landscape (approx. 50m2 increase) risks the property becoming a ‘beacon’.


In response to questions raised, it was reported that there was no formal way to measure light pollution however there was a need to take a pragmatic view because of the location and the impact on dark skies.  The north elevation would be less impactive but would still create a glow.


Having heard from speakers on behalf of the supporter, statement from the Parish Council and Ward Member, Members debated the application.  During the debate, one Member supported the officer’s recommendation.  Other Members felt that this breached a number of polices, over dominant and subservient to the main building and could have an extension that blends better with the original building.   Another Member felt although visible it was also quite well hidden by the wooden area and hedge.  Concerns were raised on the glazing and closeness to the undeveloped coast. 


Recommendation:                 Refusal


Committee decision:             Refusal


Supporting documents: