Agenda and draft minutes

County Councillor Phil Murphy declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest pursuant to the Members’ code of conduct in respect of application DM/2024/00985, as his son used to work with the applicant.

County Councillor Meirion Howells declared a personal and prejudicial interest pursuant to the Members’ code of conduct in respect of application DM/2023/01679, as he is a pacifist.  He therefore left the meeting taking no part in the discussion or voting thereon in respect of this application.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=gb9t5xfpNvKoAeXX&t=169

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting dated 1^st October 2024 were confirmed and signed by the Chair.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=np8NbdgMfA6meNid&t=200

Consideration of application DM/2023/01341 was deferred to a future meeting of the Planning Committee to allow officers to address issues raised in respect of the site and the impact on neighbours.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=98aQ0wTrjXcpmGsK&t=257

We considered the report of the application and late correspondence which was recommended for approval subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=h6BfJDTkajBmTSrt&t=274

In noting the detail of the application and the views expressed, it was proposed by County Councillor Maureen Powell and seconded by County Councillor Dale Rooke that application DM/2023/01679 be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

Upon being put to the vote, the following votes were recorded:

For approval             -           7         

Against approval      -           1

Abstentions               -           2

The proposition was carried.

We resolved that application DM/2023/01679 be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

We considered the report of the application and late correspondence which was presented for refusal for the reasons outlined in the report. However, it was considered that reason two for refusal should be omitted.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=h2WG-IbR9ddX8NH2&t=1181

In noting the detail of the application and the views expressed, it was proposed by County Councillor Maureen Powell and seconded by County Councillor Emma Bryn that application DM/2024/00985 be refused for Reason 1, outlined in the report.

Upon being put tot the vote, the following votes were recorded:

For refusal                -           6

Against refusal         -           6

Abstentions               -           1

The proposition was tied.

Therefore, the Chair exercised his casting vote and voted to refuse the application for Reason 1, outlined in the report. The proposition was therefore carried.

We resolved that application DM/2024/00985 be refused for Reason 1, outlined in the report.

We considered the report of the application and late correspondence in which the officer recommendation was split, as follows:

Rear Extension: Refuse for the one reason outlined in the report with an amendment to remove any reference to privacy.

Porch: Approve subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=Jjzvu3g1p8NlPkgt&t=3962

In noting the detail of the application and the views expressed, it was proposed by County Councillor Maureen Powell and seconded by County Councillor Su McConnel that we support the officer recommendation as follows:

Rear Extension: Refuse for the one reason outlined in the report with an amendment to remove any reference to privacy.

Porch: Approve subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

Upon being put to the vote the following votes were recorded:

In favour of the officer recommendation              -           11

Against the officer recommendation                     -           2

Abstentions                                                               -           0

The proposition was carried.

We resolved to support the officer recommendation in respect of application DM/2024/00845 as follows:

Rear Extension: Refuse for the one reason outlined in the report with an amendment to remove any reference to privacy.

Porch: Approve subject to the conditions outlined in the report.

https://www.youtube.com/live/r5JUTxRgI-4?si=DS1cFRI6-pCw7F2S&t=5848

We received the Planning Inspectorate report which related to an appeal decision following a site visit that had been held at 17 St Mary Street, Chepstow, Monmouthshire on 9^th September 2024.

We noted that the appeal had been dismissed.

We received the Planning Inspectorate report which related to an appeal decision following a site visit that had been held at Former Whitemill Welsh Water Works, Usk Road, Shirenewton, Monmouthshire on 9th September 2024.

We noted that the appeal had been dismissed.

We received the Planning Inspectorate report which related to an appeal decision following a site visit that had been held at Land North West Of Holly Lodge (also known as Land at High Mass Cottage and Land at Church View), Five Lanes North, Five Lanes, Caerwent, Monmouthshire on 24^th September 2024.

Appeal A

We noted that subject to the corrections and variations outlined in the Inspector’s report, Appeal A was dismissed, and the enforcement notice was upheld.

Appeal B

We noted that the appeal was allowed and planning permission was granted for change of use from agriculture to land for the keeping of horses (retrospective), proposed erection of stable block for 5 horses, erection of ancillary storage building, construction of manege, at Land North West Of Holly Lodge (also known as Land at High Mass Cottage and Land at Church View), Five Lanes North, Five Lanes, Caerwent, Monmouthshire NP26 5PG, in accordance with the terms of the application, reference DM/2023/01042, dated 24 July 2023, subject to the conditions set out in the schedule.

We received the Planning Inspectorate report which related to the costs decision in respect of land North West Of Holly Lodge (also known as Land at High Mass Cottage and Land at Church View), Five Lanes North, Five Lanes, Caerwent, Monmouthshire.

We noted that the application for an award of costs had been refused with regard to Appeal A and Appeal B.

We noted the planning appeals received by the Planning Department for the period 1st July to 30th September 2024.