Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Trevor Carbin (substituted by Councillor Gordon King), Sarah Gibson (substituted by Councillor David Jenkins) and Philip Alford (substituted by Councillor David Halik). The Chair noted that all other members were in attendance.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2017.

The minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2017 were presented.

Resolved:

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 26 July 2017.

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

It was noted, following a statement made by Councillor Jonathon Seed, that a number of Committee members would have considered application W/11/02440/FUL at Sutton Veny when it was before the Western Area Planning Committee in 2012, but that those members would be considering the matter afresh with an open mind.

Councillor Edward Kirk stated that due to a non-pecuniary interest he would not speak or vote on the application ref 17/05137/FUL - Coopers Chase, Church Street, Hilperton, Trowbridge, Wiltshire, BA14 7RL.

Noting that there was an application in his ward, namely 17/05137/FUL, Councillor Ernie Clark referred the public to his declaration of interest open to public inspection.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no Chairman’s Announcements.

The Chairman gave details of the exits to be used in the event of an emergency.

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 (4 clear working days, e.g. Wednesday of week before a Wednesday meeting) 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 (2 clear working days, eg Friday of week before a Wednesday meeting). 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 question submitted by Councillor Ernie Clark and the response included in the agenda papers was noted.

It was also noted that an additional question submitted had been responded to directly by officers. The Chairman reminded members that all questions should relate to the business of the Committee.

The Chairman welcomed all present. He then explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

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

The Planning Appeals Update Report for the period between the 14/07/2017 and 11/08/2017 was received.

Resolved:

To note the Planning Appeals Update Report for 14/07/2017 and 11/08/2017.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Public Participation

Mr William Owen, Mr Ian Walpole and Mr William Pierce spoke in objection to the application.

Mr James Whilding, agent, spoke in support of the application

Cllr Stephen Oxlade, Sutton Veny Parish Council, spoke on the application

Cllr David Searle, Longbridge Parish Council, spoke on the application

Mike Kilmister, as Neighbourhood Planning Manager, outlined the report for the demolition of four existing poultry buildings to be replaced by four new poultry buildings. It was recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

The key planning issues identified in the officer’s presentation were outlined to

include: the principle of development; the location of the site and that it is in the open countryside within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty; the history of the application and the three reasons that the Committee deferred the consideration of the application; the access to the site and the connection to the A350; the proximity of other properties including industrial and residential; that the committee had had the opportunity to visit the site; the history and use of the existing buildings, and that the lawful use of the site is for agriculture and that of poultry rearing.

The changes in the application from that previously reported to the Committee were explained including the reduction in the capacity for the number of birds; the comparison of the elevation of the new buildings to those on the site already; the topography of the site and the existence of a bund; the operation of the site and the impact on environmental health issues.

The submitted plans and member site visit identified the provision of screening by trees; however it was acknowledged that additional landscape plan details would need to be submitted, which is recommended by condition, which would require the Council’s written approval.  The views of the site from the public rights of way and other neighbouring properties were identified and it was confirmed that the applicant had amended the scheme following discussions with the Environment Agency who had issued a permit – which sets out conditions in relation to potential noise, fugitive emissions (incl dust and flies), odour and ammonia releases; as well as pre-commencement conditions that need to be satisfied before on site operations are started.

Members were advised that the public have been able to comment on the permit, and it was open to public scrutiny.  The officer explained that the Environment Agency in reaching their decision took account of all their relevant considerations and legal requirements to ensure the permit would provide a high level of protection for the environment and human health. the Environment Agency raised no objection to this application.  The Environment Agency raised no objection to the planning application.

Members were also advised on planning policy and the weight that can be given to tests that are required to be met for major development in the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and it was confirmed by officers that these tests had been met.  Members were informed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

Public Participation

Mr Cooper, spoke in support of the application

Verity Giles, as planning officer, outlined the report for a proposed garage and studio. It was recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

The key planning issues identified in the officer’s presentation were outlined to

include: the principle of development; impact on the neighbouring properties; the views of the local residents including those submitted after publication of the report; the construction material and the windows proposed; the relationship to the existing dwelling and neighbouring properties including the potential impact on privacy and the adjacent listed building; the access to the site;

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. The questions focused on: the position of the dwellings in relation to the map.

Councillor Ernie Clark proposed, subsequently seconded by Councillor David Halik, that the proposal be approved subject to the inclusion of the following additional condition:

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended by the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (No.2) (England) Order 2008 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting or amending that Order with or without modification), there shall be no additions, extensions or enlargements or additional wall and/or roof openings to the garage/studio hereby permitted.

REASON:  To define the terms of the permission and in the interests of the amenity of the area and to enable the Local Planning Authority to consider individually whether planning permission should be granted for additions, extensions, alterations and enlargements.

In moving his proposal, Councillor Ernie Clark thanked the officers for their advice on this application. In response to an issue raised, officers advised that a further condition would be required to secure the use of materials to match the host dwellinghouse, known as Coopers Chase. Following the consent of the proposer and seconder, this was included in the proposal.

Members of the public and the parish council had the opportunity to present

their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

At the conclusion of the debate it was;

Resolved:

To approve planning permission subject to the following conditions:

Public Participation

Colin Goodwood, agent, spoke in support of the application

Kate Sullivan, as planning officer, outlined the report for a car port. It was recommended that the application be refused.

The key planning issues identified in the officer’s presentation were outlined to include: the materials to be used in the proposals; how the proposals is not considered permitted development; the relationship of the site to adjacent properties and the views from the street; and the objection raised by the Town Council;

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. In response to the questions, the following matters were confirmed: the position of the gazebox, the parking provision and amount of hardstanding; the potential impact of the gazebox on vehicle movements to and from the existing access; that consideration of any future applications for similar gazeboxes would be decided on their own merits.

Members of the public had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above. Councillor Jonathon Seed read out the statement submitted by the local ward member, Councillor John Hubbard who was unable to attend the meeting.

At the start of the debate Councillor Gordon King, subsequently seconded by Councillor Edward Kirk, moved that permission should be granted for the proposal subject to appropriate conditions.

In the debate that followed, issues discussed included: the need to delegate authority to officers to finalise the conditions to address issues including the panel material, lighting and screening.

Following the conclusion of the debate, the meeting;

Resolved

To delegate authority to the Head of Development Management Services to grant planning permission subject to conditions to be determined by officers, including conditions to address issues of the internal and external lighting, mechanical openings and vinyl coverings to be used; and to ensure the retention of appropriate boundary treatments.

The wording of these conditions was delegated to officers and subsequently agreed as:

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