Agenda item

Demolition of existing dwelling and annexe and construction of 4 dwellings.

Public Participation

Cllr Kirsty Exton, Chair of Idmiston Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.

The Senior Planning Officer, Julie Mitchell introduced a report which recommended that the application for demolition of existing dwelling and annexe and the Construction of 4 dwellings be approved subject to conditions and a s106 legal agreement to secure the proposed mitigation for phosphates.

Key details were stated to include the principle of development, Landscape/visual impacts, Residential amenity, Highways, Archaeology, and Ecology/River Avon SAC catchment.

Of the four proposed dwellings, plot 2 would have an agricultural occupancy condition, to replace the existing agricultural worker’s dwelling to be demolished and allow for ongoing management of the adjacent farmland.

As part of the required nutrient mitigation for the site, the applicant had proposed to set aside a section of land for planting. 

Members of the committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on the planting for the mitigation plot which would be included within the s106 agreement, the cutting back of vegetation to improve visibility onto the Highway and the Idmiston Parish Council Neighbourhood Plan (IPCNP).

It was noted that the IPCNP and Wiltshire Core Strategy made up the Development Plan for the area and that the application site was in accordance with policy. 

The Core Strategy set out designated settlement boundaries of which the application site was within and was considered acceptable by the Officer.

The IPCNP however had identified sites for future development, of which the application site was not included.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the committee as detailed above.

The Unitary Division Member, councillor Rich Rogers then spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr Rogers noted that significant development had already taken place which met and exceeded the IPCNP requirement of 32 dwellings and stated that there would need to be a statement regarding the maintenance of the proposed visibility displays.

Reference was also made to the size of the proposed dwellings in that the executive style homes did not meet the local need and that the site was more appropriate for a single dwelling with an agricultural tie.

Traffic issues were highlighted, with specific areas of congestion on Idmiston Road during school drop off and pick up times. Noncompliance to CP60, sustainable transport was raised.

Councillor Rich Rogers then moved a motion of Refusal against Officer recommendation stating the reasons as, Highways Safety, Conflict with Core Policies CP1, CP45, CP48 and CP60 and paragraphs 9, 10, and 14 of the IPCNP.

The motion was seconded by Councillor Sven Hocking.

A debate followed where the scale of development, the Environmental/highway impact of the proposal was discussed.

The Committee noted the comments of the local member relating to the production of the IPCNP and the local objection to development on the application site and discussed the level of weight a Neighbourhood Plan carried in planning considerations. 

It was clarified for Members that the site was within the settlement boundary.

Some points raised included that there was no objection from Highways, and whether once the target figure for housing numbers had been reached, there was justification to object on those grounds to further development. The style and design of the proposed dwellings was also considered.

The Officer clarified that a set figure of 32 was a target to work towards and not a limit which could not be exceeded. Therefore, applications for developments within the settlement boundary must continue to be considered where they aligned with planning policy.

The Committee noted the frustration for those who contributed to adoption of a Neighbourhood Plan and the comments regarding a local need for smaller homes as opposed to the larger executive style as proposed. 

At the close of debate, the Committee voted on the motion of refusal for the reasons as stated above.

It was;

Resolved

That planning permission for application PL/2023/08067 be Refused for the following reasons:

The proposed redevelopment of the site would provide three additional 4-bedroom dwellings together with a smaller replacement 2-bedroom dwelling to replace the existing agricultural workers’ dwelling on the site. Whilst the site is located within the defined settlement boundary of a large village, as set out in the Wiltshire Core Strategy (Core Policies 2 and 4), the proposed increase in the number of dwellings would generate additional traffic in the centre of Porton and the application fails to demonstrate how this traffic will be managed in terms of congestion and highway safety, particularly given the road is heavily trafficked at school drop off and pick up times from St Nicholas Primary School in the same road and with traffic from the nearby Porton Down campus, as such the proposal is contrary to the Idmiston Neighbourhood Plan Policies 9 and 10. The development would lead to an oversupply of larger dwellings in the settlement in excess of the number of homes planned in the Idmiston Parish in the Neighbourhood Plan period 2015-2026, contrary to the Policy 19 of the Neighbourhood Plan. Consequently, the increase and type of dwellings would be contrary to the aims of WCS Core Policy 1 which requires that development at large villages is limited to that needed to help meet the housing needs of the settlement, WCS Core Policy 45 which requires that the size and type of new housing is well designed to address local housing need of the community in which the site is located and WCS Core Policy 60 which requires mitigation of the impact of developments on transport users, local communities and the environment.