Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Liz Hogger and Councillor James Steel attended as her substitute.

In accordance with the local Code of Conduct, a councillor is required to disclose at the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) that they may have in respect of any matter for consideration on this agenda.  Any councillor with a DPI must not participate in any discussion or vote regarding that matter and they must also withdraw from the meeting immediately before consideration of the matter.

If that DPI has not been registered, you must notify the Monitoring Officer of the details of the DPI within 28 days of the date of the meeting.

Councillors are further invited to disclose any non-pecuniary interest which may be relevant to any matter on this agenda, in the interests of transparency, and to confirm that it will not affect their objectivity in relation to that matter.

No disclosures of interest were declared.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19 August and 2 September 2020 as attached at Item 3. A copy of the minutes will be placed on the dais prior to the meeting.

The minutes of the Planning Committee meetings held on 19 August and 2 September 2020 were approved and signed by the Chairman as a true record subject to the minor amendments as detailed in the supplementary late sheets.

To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee.

The Committee noted the procedures for determining planning applications.

The Committee considered the above-mentioned full application for variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission 17/P/01389, approved on 05/10/2017, to allow changes to the approved scheme.

The Committee was informed by the planning officer that that application was for a minor material amendment to the original application 17/P/01389 which was granted permission for the redevelopment of the crematorium.  The application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the applicant was the Council.  As a Section 73 application this was classified as a major planning application with the amendments comprising of an alteration to the chimney stack on the main crematorium building.  Further information was detailed on the supplementary late sheets in respect of the design approach employed by the applicant. 

The crematorium site was bounded by New Pond Road to the north and Old Portsmouth Road to the east.  The site was accessed from New Pond Road.  Broadwater Cottages were located to the north of the main building and provided housing for the crematorium staff. 

The crematorium building as consented had now been constructed onsite.  The main parking areas were located to the east of the building with a walkway between and a small administrative car park to the north.  The building was well screened on all sides with very limited visibility of the site from the Old Portsmouth Road and could only be viewed by glimpses from New Pond Road. 

The amendment proposed sought to increase the height of the stack by 0.9 metres to ensure emissions sufficiently dispersed following a recalculation of the original figures and had been agreed with the Council’s Environmental Health Officer.  The change in the size of the stack was apparent and more prominent however planning officers considered that it did not go beyond a minor material amendment to the overall scheme and the effect would not be harmful in planning terms.  The chimney was visible from the approach from the main car park but was not considered to be an especially prominent feature and would have little effect upon the overall appearance of the building.  The application was therefore recommended for approval subject to conditions. 

The Committee discussed the application and concerns raised as to why the technical errors requiring the alteration to the chimney stack had not been picked up sooner by the architect.  The Committee noted that this entire matter was scheduled to be reviewed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at their meeting in October.  The Committee nevertheless wished to seek assurance that the new design proposed would sufficiently overcome the pollutant risk that the building currently posed with the existing chimney stack.  The Committee were also concerned that the new chimney stack proposed was utilitarian and industrial in design which was not fitting for a crematorium. 

The Team Leader for Environmental Control stated in response to comments made by the Committee that the crematorium operations were granted by permits which sat outside the planning process.  However, given the figures originally calculated were incorrect, this had to  ...  view the full minutes text for item PL39

Committee members are asked to note the details of Appeal Decisions as attached at Item 6.

The Committee noted the appeal decisions.