Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Cllr Ben Anderson who was substituted by Cllr Phillip Whalley.

Apologies were also received from Cllr Ashley O’Neil and Cllr Howard Greenman.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 23 May 2017.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 23 May 2017.

Resolved:

To approve as a true and correct record and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 23 May 2017.

To receive any declarations of disclosable interests or dispensations granted by the Standards Committee.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

The Chairman announced that due to unexpected large numbers of public attendance at the meeting, Councillors would vote to move certain agenda items forward. Namely Items 7b and 7c, but also 7e.

The Council welcomes contributions from members of the public.

Statements

Members of the public who wish to speak either in favour or against an application or any other item on this agenda are asked to register by phone, email or in person no later than 2.50pm on the day of the meeting.

The rules on public participation in respect of planning applications are detailed in the Council’s Planning Code of Good Practice. The Chairman will allow up to 3 speakers in favour and up to 3 speakers against an application and up to 3 speakers on any other item on this agenda. Each speaker will be given up to 3 minutes and invited to speak immediately prior to the item being considered.

Members of the public will have had the opportunity to make representations on the planning applications and to contact and lobby their local member and any other members of the planning committee prior to the meeting. Lobbying once the debate has started at the meeting is not permitted, including the circulation of new information, written or photographic which have not been verified by planning officers.

Questions

To receive any questions from members of the public or members of the Council received in accordance with the constitution which excludes, in particular, questions on non-determined planning applications.

Those wishing to ask questions are required to give notice of any such questions in writing to the officer named on the front of this agenda no later than 5pm on Wednesday 7 June 2017 in order to be guaranteed of a written response. In order to receive a verbal response questions must be submitted no later than 5pm on Friday 9 June 2017. Please contact the officer named on the front of this agenda for further advice. Questions may be asked without notice if the Chairman decides that the matter is urgent.

Details of any questions received will be circulated to Committee members prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website.

The Committee noted the rules on public participation.

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate.

The Committee noted the contents of the appeals update.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Attention was drawn to the late list of observations provided at the meeting and attached to these minutes, in respect of applications 7b- 16/03721/REM and 7c- 16/04544/REM- Land North of Bath Road, Corsham, as listed in the agenda pack.

Further to the Chairman’s announcement, Cllr Tony Trotman proposed that Agenda Items 7b- 16/03721/REM  and 7c- 16/04544/REM- Land North of Bath Road, Corsham, be brought forward in the agenda to be heard first. This motion was seconded by Cllr Peter Hutton and the Committee approved hearing these Items first.

The Senior Planning Officer referred the Committee to the late observations and explained that the submission from objectors was received shortly prior to Committee. The applicant had requested an opportunity to consider and respond to the submission. Due to the nature of the submission made there was a significant amount of work required to address the points raised, the Officer’s recommendation was therefore to defer the items. This recommendation was proposed by Cllr Tony Trotman, seconded by Cllr Christine Crisp, and approved by the Committee.

Resolved:

Applications: 7b- 16/03721/REM  and 7c- 16/04544/REM

DEFERRED to allow the applicant to consider and respond to matters raised by objectors and submitted as late representations immediately prior to Committee.

Further to the Chairman’s announcements, Cllr Tony Trotman proposed moving Agenda Item 7e forward in the agenda. This was seconded by Cllr Gavin Grant and approved by the Committee.

Members of the public Alan Norman, John Parker and Karen Dykstra spoke against the application.

The applicant’s agent Matthew Dawber spoke in favour of the application.

Cllr Janet Georgiou, Royal Wootton Bassett Town Council, spoke against the application.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application for the permanent retention of existing temporary road as an agricultural access. A presentation was shown containing photographs of existing site, both long range and short range, along with diagrams of proposed developments. The Officer’s recommendation was for approval subject to conditions outlined in the report.

Members were invited to ask technical questions. In response to questions, the Officer confirmed that a condition was included requiring the approval of any proposals for the erection of lighting for the road/access and that if the Committee felt it necessary the wording of the condition could be amended to strengthen the position regarding restrictions on lighting. The Officer clarified that this would not and could not stop the submission of future applications for the erection of lighting for the road/access and that any future application would need to be considered on its merits and in the context of material considerations and circumstances relevant at that time.

Members of the public were invited to speak as listed above.

Local Member Cllr Chris Hurst spoke against the application. He stated that approving the application would cause significant harm to the local area, referring to public health concerns and enjoyment of the local area. He explained that the road had originally been built under a certificate of lawfulness to fulfil a specific temporary purpose, with the condition that it would be removed. He said that pledges had been made to residents by Wiltshire Council, in this respect and he urged Members to keep that promise. He also encouraged Members to consider deferring the item, so that alternative proposals, put forward by residents, could be properly investigated if an outright refusal was not considered appropriate.

In the debate that followed Cllr Chris Hurst proposed that the application be refused, based on significant harm to the area. This was seconded by Cllr Gavin Grant. However, Cllr Toby Sturgis expressed concerns that if the Committee refused the application, there was a chance that it could be successful at appeal and for there to be less favourable conditions put in place. He suggested that a deferment may be more suitable, showing that the Committee are willing to consider options and work with the applicant. Consequently, Cllr Hurst withdrew his motion, as did Cllr Grant. Cllr Sturgis proposed a second motion, that the application be deferred to allow the applicant to consider the alternative proposals put forward by residents. This was seconded by Cllr Phillip Whalley and approved by the Committee.

Resolved:

Deferred to offer the applicant an opportunity to consider and respond to alternate scheme proposals  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53b

Members of the public Jonathan Li and Andrew Gregory spoke against the application.

The applicant Shofi Mahmud spoke in favour of the application.

Cllr Nina Phillips, Chippenham Town Council, spoke against the application.

The Team Leader introduced the application for a Change of Use for A5 Hot Food Catering. A presentation was given showing existing site, front and rear, and the relationship between the commercial unit and the residential properties above and in the surrounding area. The Officer explained that significant objections had been received and that a petition had also been raised. However, he clarified that the number of objections is not in itself a determinative factor. Officers explained the policy position and framework relevant to the site and the proposal. They identified the principal considerations that had been the matter of assessment including input from Public Protection and Highways officers, these being impacts to residential amenities through noise and odour disturbance; highways impacts and parking requirements.

Members of the Committee were invited to ask technical questions. It was clarified that if residents had concerns as to health concerns, whether it be noise or smells, the Public Health Protection Team could be contacted and would investigate any concerns.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above.

The Local Member Cllr Andy Phillips spoke against the application, stating that not enough weight was being given to the resident’s health and happiness. He stated that not enough consideration had been given as to the impact on residents, through noise and odour issues, along with lack of parking.

In the debate that followed, Cllr Peter Hutton proposed the Officer’s recommendation for approval, with the additional informative or conditions that residents be given advance notice of any maintenance of the extractor system and for all goods deliveries to be made during daytime hours. This was seconded by Cllr Tony Trotman and approved by the Committee.

Resolved:

To GRANT Planning Permission as per officer recommendation subject to an additional condition and additional informative as follows:

CONDITION:-

All goods deliveries associated with the use herby permitted shall take place during daytime hours and not during evenings. Daytime hours hereby defined as between 8.30 am and 18:00 pm.

REASON: In the interests of residential amenity.

INFORMATIVE:-

The applicant is advised to provide written notification to neighbouring residential properties above the application site of proposed maintenance works to the ventilation extraction plant hereby approved in advance of the works taking place.

And the original conditions of the Officer’s Recommendations:

CONDITIONS:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON: To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. No development shall commence on site until details of the following matters (in respect of which approval is expressly reserved) have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority:

(a) Materials and finishes to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53c

The applicant’s agent Richard Harlow spoke in favour of the application.

The Team Leader introduced the application which was for a detached single garage. Photos were shown of the site, which was identified as being within a conservation area which is a heritage asset. A location plan was shown, along with diagrams of proposed elevations and floor plans which were shown in comparison to a previously refused scheme and the site layout plans for the approved newly built dwellings at the site. It was highlighted that although there was a similar permission granted in the area previously, there were material considerations and site circumstances relevant to  that application which did not apply in this instance. The Officers recommendation was for refusal. 

Members were invited to ask technical questions and in response Members were informed that permitted development rights would not apply to this part of the property (frontage adjacent a public highway), and would therefore not have enabled the applicant to build a shed at the front of the property.

Members of the public spoke as detailed above.

Cllr Peter Hutton spoke on behalf of the Local member, Cllr Howard Greenman. He questioned why the application should be refused where a larger garage of a similar nature was permitted in the nearby area.

In the debate that followed, Cllr Christine Crisp spoke of the importance of preserving the heritage asset and proposed the Officer’s recommendation for refusal. This was seconded by Cllr Sturgis and the Committee voted to approve the application.

Resolved:

To REFUSE Planning Permission for the following reasons:

1.The proposed development, by reason of its design and location fails to conserve the character of the Conservation Area. This harm is not otherwise justified by any wider public benefit. The proposal is therefore contrary to Core Policy 57 (i) and 58 of the adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy, section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and paragraphs 17, 58, 131, 132, 134, and 137 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Any other items of business which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be taken as a matter of urgency.

There were no urgent items.