Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed all parties to the meeitng and explained the emergency evacuation procedure.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Chris Windows and Councillor Chris Jackson (Steve Pearce substituting).

To note any interests relevant to the consideration of items on the agenda.

Any declarations of interest made at the meeting which are not on the register of interests should be notified to the Monitoring Officer for inclusion.

Councillor Fabian Breckels declared an interest in Agenda Item 9(a) Planning Application Number 21/03536/FB – Land to Rear of Filwood Broadway as a member of the Cinema Theatre Association but confirmed that he retained an open mind in respect of this application.

To agree the minutes of the following meetings as a correct record.

The Committee considered the following sets of minutes for approval as a correct record.

This meeting was rearranged to 12^th October 2022 as the previous meeting date of 14^th September 2022 was within the mourning period following the death of Queen Elizabeth II.

RESOLVED – that the minutes of the above meeitng be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

RESOLVED – that the minutes of the above meeting be approved a a correct record and signed by the Chair subject to the alteration of the time of the next meeting in the “Date of Next Meeitng” minute from 6.30pm to 6pm.

The Committee is requested to note any outstanding actions listed on the rolling Action Sheet for DCB Committee.

There were no outstanding actions.

To note appeals lodged, imminent public inquiries and appeals awaiting decision.

The Head of Development Management introduced this report and pointed out that Item Number 20: Land At Broom Hill/Brislington Meadows Broomhill Road Bristol BS4 4UD would be the subject of an inquiry starting on 31^st January 2023 and lasting for 11 days. It was noted that there had been a change of inspector.

In response to members’ questions, he stated that:

·       Number 17 – Land at Home Gardens, Redland Hill, Bristol BS6 6UR – Officers would advise the Committee when this application would be coming back to Committee

·       Number 21 – Merchant Arms. Bell Hill, Bristol BS16 1BQ - Expert opinion was that the Council could not sustain an objection to this appeal. However, contrary advice had been received from CAMERA and therefore further discussions would be taking place concerning this issue

To note enforcement notices.

The Committee noted this report.

Any member of the public or councillor may participate in public forum. The detailed  arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda. Please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:

Questions:

Written questions must be received three clear working days prior to the meeting. For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received at the latest by 5pm on Thursday 12^th January 2023.

Petitions and statements:

Petitions and statements must be received by noon on the working day prior to the meeting. For this meeting, this means that your submission must be received at the latest by 12 Noon on Tuesday 17^th January 2023.

The statement should be addressed to the Service Director, Legal Services, c/o The Democratic Services Team, City Hall, 3^rd Floor Deanery Wing, College Green,

P O Box 3176, Bristol, BS3 9FS or email - democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk

PLEASE NOTE THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEW STANDING ORDERS AGREED BY BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL, YOU MUST SUBMIT EITHER A STATEMENT, PETITION OR QUESTION TO ACCOMPANY YOUR REGISTER TO SPEAK.

In accordance with previous practice adopted for people wishing to speak at Development Control Committees, please note that you may only be allowed 1 minute subject to the number of requests received for the meeting.

Members of the Committee received Public Forum Statements in advance of the meeting. The Statements were heard before the application they related to and were taken fully into consideration by the Committee prior to reaching a decision.

To consider the following applications for Development Control Committee B -

The Committee considered the following Planning Applications:

Councillor Guy Poultney arrived after the start of this item. Therefore, in accordance with the Code of Conduct for Councillors on Planning Matters, he was unable to participate in the debate or vote on this item.

The Chair reminded the Committee that approval for demolition of the cinema had already been made in 2019 and so members were unable to consider the demolition itself but purely the method of demolition. It was noted that this was extremely unfortunate and that the Committee had a great deal of sympathy for members of the public in this situation.

The case officer for this Planning Application introduced this report and made the following comments during their presentation:

·       Details of the site were shown as well as of the proposed development

·       The current building was a 1930’s style building which had used as a Bingo Hall in the 1930’s. It had been empty since 1994 and has been classed as permitted development

·       The building was suitable for modern commercial retail use

·       The proposed development was for 30 residential dwellings with commercial floor space on the ground floor

·       There had been 8 objections relating to the new access road and concerns relating to increased traffic

·       The development was within the Knowle West Regeneration Framework

·       The scale of the building was deemed acceptable

·       Some initial highway concerns had been addressed and were now considered suitable

·       Officers recommended approval of the application subject to conditions and a Memorandum of Understanding

In response to members’ questions, officers made the following comments:

·       F1 and F2 Classes would allow community use

·       There was the potential to use the ground floor for community use

·       There was a mix of retail development on the site ie a betting shop, charity shops etc

·       Officers did not believe it would be appropriate to limit the development by condition to one particular ward since work was taking place across boundaries with a 10% requirement across the city by the end of 2023

·       The proposal was policy compliant

·       Once a site was allocated in the Development Plan, it was important to remain within what was required.

·       A number of units were being retained and there were good pedestrian links

·       There was a minor concern about the impact of loss of parking from residents’ parking but it was noted that retail development could still be serviced form the main road

·       Existing units would be lower to take into account the loss of parking. There would also be commercial and residential waste storage units

·       There had been no objections received from Bristol Waste

·       The number of dwellings was currently 20 but under the local land allocation would be uplifted to 30. There would be 62 dwellings per hectare on the site which was an increase from the minimum requirement of 50

·       The reduction in parking space could be used for extra cycle space if requested by the residents but the criteria for cycling had already been met

·       There was a net gain of six concerning trees – 8  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35a

The Case Officer for this application introduced this report and made the following comments:

·       As indicated on the amendment sheet, the applicant had exercised their right to refer the application directly to the Secretary of State for approval

·       Deviations from the previous application had been approved

·       Officers believed that the installation of the proposed pillars and the re-design of the bay windows should be included if the Inspector was minded to grant the appeal

·       Legal advice had been obtained in relation to the condition proposed by the Committee at the last meeting relating to enforcement of noise. This had confirmed that it would not meet the required test

·       Officers were, therefore, recommending  that the Committee resolve that had it been able to determine this application, it would have approved it

·       In the meantime, officers would continue to pursue rigorous enforcement of the building as a large use HMO

In response to members’ questions, officers made the following comments:

·       Officers had been advised that it was likely that the development would be used for long-term letting and C3/C4 retail use

·       The HMO is currently licensed for small use lettings and it was therefore assumed that the development would meet space standards for this

·       Whilst there was understandable concern amongst Committee members that there had been a breach of planning regulations in this case, the planning process did allow an application for retrospective approval. Any assessment of this application had to be made dispassionately and, in this case, involved purely the request for external alterations. If the application had requested a large term HMO and short lettings, it is likely that officers would be recommending refusal

·       In the meantime, the previous breach was being investigated by the enforcement team subject to reassurances from the applicant that these activities would cease. This enforcement case would continue until any breach ceased

·       Whilst the legal opinion set out in one of the Public Forum statements was noted, officers did not necessarily agree with this. Whilst this would be a consideration if the final decision did not rest with the Planning Inspector or if the applicants were applying to change permission in accordance with Section 73, it would not now be possible for DCB Committee to be challenged for its decision

·       A change of use was by law a matter of fact and degree based on the evidence received. Whilst any approval could include an Advice Note, the legal advice they had received was that any condition would fail the required test. However, the Committee could choose to put forward a condition if it chose to do so and the Planning Inspector could put firmer controls on this

·       Whilst the Committee was no longer determining this application, the Planning Inspector needed to know the view of the Committee on this issue

·       Enforcement action could be pursued regardless of the Inspector’s decision

·       Internal changes are not controllable under planning regulations. Therefore, the main issue for the Committee to consider is whether or not the external arrangements are  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35b

The next meeting is scheduled for 2pm on Wednesday 8^th March 2023 in the Council Chamber, City Hall, College Green, Bristol.

The next meeting is scheduled to be held at 2pm on Wednesday 8th March 2023 in the Council Chamber, City Hall, College Green, Bristol.