Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from:

• Councillor Trevor Carbin, who was substituted by Councillor Gordon King
• Councillor Jonathon Seed, who was substituted by Councillor Tony Jackson
• Councillor Suzanne Wickham, who was substituted by Councillor Mike Sankey

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 7 August 2024.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 7 August 2024 were considered. Following which, it was:

Resolved:

The Committee approved and signed the minutes of the previous meeting held on 7 August 2024 as a true and correct record.

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.

There were no specific Chairman’s announcements.

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 no later than 10 minutes before the start of the meeting. If it is on the day of the meeting registration should be done in person.

The rules on public participation in respect of planning applications are linked to 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 and others will have had the opportunity to make representations on planning applications and other items on the agenda, and to contact and lobby their local elected member and any other members of the planning committee, prior to the meeting.

Those circulating such information prior to the meeting, written or photographic, are advised to also provide a copy to the case officer for the application or item, in order to officially log the material as a representation, which will be verbally summarised at the meeting by the relevant officer, not included within any officer slide presentation if one is made. Circulation of new information which has not been verified by planning officers or case officers is also not permitted during the meetings.

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 28 August 2024 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 30 August 2024. 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 Chairman explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

There were no questions or statements submitted by Councillors or members of the public.

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

Before hearing from Kenny Green, Development Team Leader, the Chairman invited Mr Francis Morland to address the Committee under public participation where he highlighted a missing appeal decision within the published appeal list relating to application PL/2022/09842, Land off Storridge Road, Westbury. Mr Morland also informed the Committee that as part of the appeal, which had been successfully defended by the Council and was dismissed, the appointed Appeal Inspector concluded that after examining the Council’s Housing Land Supply Position, the Council was now in deficit, having 3.85 years supply when tested against the extant 4-year requirement.

Kenny Green provided a summary of the key outcomes of the Storridge Farm appeal decision which identified that despite there being a Housing Land Supply deficit, material weight could still be applied to the Council’s strategic policies, but more crucially, where there was a robust technical reason for refusing new housing developments (such as noise detriment and concerns over future amenities and living conditions), the Council was able to defend the appeal.

Officers acknowledged that the appeal decision would have been reported to the next Strategic Planning Committee meeting and that there had been no meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee taking place in September 2024. Members were also informed that the appeal had been made after 23 August 2024, and therefore after the publication of the Western Area Planning Committee agenda. At the Chairman’s request, Kenny Green assured Members that the appeal decision would be circulated to Members after the meeting.

In addition to the above, reference was made briefly as to officers seeking legal advice on other pending appeals, including Land at Glenmore Farm, Westbury, and Land at Westbury Road, Warminster.

The reported and dismissed appeal for application PL/2023/10654, as set out within the Agenda Pack, was also summarised, and pertained to an outline application for 4 no. dwellings in open countryside and was issued prior to the Storridge Road appeal decision. Members were nevertheless informed of the Council’s successful appeal defence, with the Planning Inspector endorsing the delegated refusal reasons citing the unsustainable site location and conflicts with the Council’s strategic policies for housing growth alongside robust technical reasons for refusal such as highway safety and unacceptable impacts on the National Primary Road Network.

Following which, it was:

Resolved:

The Committee noted the appeals report for the period 26 July 2024 to 23 August 2024.

Demolition of existing modular classroom and rear extension to main school building to accommodate the erection of two storey building on existing playground with erection of single storey rear extension and associated landscaping.

Public Participation

• Ms Belinda Bates, Nestlings Pre-School, spoke in objection to the application.
• Ms Heather Derrick, Nestlings Pre-School, spoke in objection to the application.
• Mr James Burgess, representative from Emmaus School, spoke in support of the application.
• Ms Hope Brett, representing the families of the school, spoke in support of the application.
• Mr Neal Thompson, agent, spoke in support of the application.

Russell Brown, Senior Planning Officer, presented the report which recommended that the Committee grant permission for the demolition of an existing modular classroom and rear extension to the main school building to accommodate the erection of a two-storey building on the existing playground with the erection of a single storey read extension and associated landscaping.

Key material considerations were identified including the principle of development; design and landscape implications; residential amenity; ecology; drainage; and highways safety issues.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. Members raised the proximity to neighbouring residential properties as well as the adjoining Nestlings Pre-School and queried the associated impacts. Clarity was also sought on safety issues in respect of the playground’s proximity to the adjacent carriageway and reassurance that there would be no landscape harm. Previous planning history was noted and Members further queried land ownership/application site adjustments alongside the proposed building materials, design, and its massing.

In response, officers explained the changes that had been made through negotiation to re-draw the red line boundary and revising the proposed extension and its associated features to address some of the raised concerns. As such, officers advised Members that they were satisfied that the application would not materially harm neighbouring/nearby properties, land uses, or the wider landscape character. Furthermore, no objections to the scheme had been raised by the Council’s Highway Team or statutory consultees.

The named public speakers as detailed above then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee.

Councillor Ernie Clark then presented a statement on behalf of Councillor Trevor Carbin, the Local Unitary Member, who was unable to attend the meeting.

A debate then followed where Members discussed the separation distances between the proposal and neighbouring properties, the existing structure and present school accommodation, and the reasons for the application.

At the conclusion of the debate, Councillor Ernie Clark moved to grant the application in line with officer recommendations which was seconded by Councillor Tony Jackson. Following a vote on the motion, it was:

Resolved:

The Committee APPROVED the application subject to the following conditions and informatives:

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. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans:

Drawing No. 1421L-01A received on 5 December 2023

Drawing No. 23-06-02E received on 28 March 2024

Drawing Nos. 23-06-01I, 23-06-03F, 23-06-04F received  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

Reserved matters application pursuant to Outline Planning Permission 16/01123/OUT relating to the appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the Proposed Primary School (including Nursery and SEN provision).

Public Participation

• Mr Tom Molyneux-Wright, agent, spoke in support of the application.
• Mr Anthony Dixon, Senior Project Manager and applicant on behalf of Wiltshire Council, spoke in support of the application.
• Councillor Alan Baines, on behalf of Melksham Without Parish Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Gen Collins, Principal Planning Officer, presented the report which recommended that the Committee delegated authority to the Head of Development Management to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and informatives, for the reserved matters application pursuant to the construction of a new Primary School (including Nursery and Special Educational Needs (SEN) provision).

Key material considerations were identified including the principle of development; design/visual appearance; heritage impact; impact on the residential amenity; highways/parking issues; ecology; drainage; and Section 106/Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL).

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. The representations received from neighbouring/local residents were raised in relation to the relevant planning history of the site and where the school was indicatively illustrated at outline stage, alongside queries regarding drainage and rainwater harvesting as an option on-site. Additional queries were raised in reference to highway safety and safe walking routes to the school, referencing the objections made by Melksham Without Parish Council.

In response, officers explained that the scheme had been subject to significant revisions and a series of consultations with local Parish/Town Councils and neighbouring residents which had led to design solutions to address the impact on neighbouring amenities. Furthermore, officers confirmed that connectivity and accessibility to the application site and proposed neighbouring 16/01123/OUT development had been discussed in detail alongside the suggestion of a left-turn only junction. However, as set out in the report on Page 72 of the Agenda, the Highways Team had concluded that this would not be required or supported in that location.

The named public speakers as detailed above then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee.

Councillor Nick Holder, as the Local Unitary Member, then spoke to the application and thanked all officers for their hard work, but reiterated the concerns raised with regard to highway safety and made the case for having a No Right Turn exit restriction.

A debate then followed where Members acknowledged the highway concerns raised by local residents and sought officer advice on whether a condition could be imposed to require the school not to be brought into use until a designed No Right Turn exit junction onto Pathfinder Way from the school had been delivered on site.

Members then discussed a number of additional planning informatives including: encouraging the applicant to consider the use of rainwater harvesting for the school; to seek the completion of the site security boundary fencing prior to the school being brought into use; to encourage the Council, as the applicant, to maximise and bring forward a safe walking route to the school from Berryfield and Semington Road; and to expedite the delivery of the footpath connectivity from the school to the wider  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

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.