Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Councillor Nick Fogg MBE.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2016.

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2016 were presented for consideration, and it was,

Resolved:

That subject to adding ‘he urged’ after the second use of ‘town council’ in paragraph 5 of Minute 33, and amending ‘formally at two separate schools’ to ‘formerly at the two separate schools’ in paragraph 7, to approve as a true and correct record and sign the minutes.

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

Councillor Stewart Dobson declared a non-pecuniary interest in the applications to be considered by virtue of a family connection to an appeal decision that was referenced in the reports. He withdrew from the Committee and did not speak or vote on the items.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no 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 in person no later than 5.50pm on the day of the meeting.

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. The rules on public participation in respect of planning applications are detailed in the Council’s Planning Code of Good Practice.

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 onThursday 28^th July 2016. 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.

Members of the public are also reminded that, whilst they 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 before the meeting, any last minute lobbying of members is not permitted once the debate has started, including the circulation of new information, written or photographic which have not been verified by our planning officers. 

The rules on public participation were noted.

To receive details of the completed and pending appeals.

The Appeals update for the period between 28 April and 22 July 2016 was received. It was noted that application 15/01052/OUT, Land off Rabley Wood View, Marlborough, which had been refused by the Committee, had been allowed on appeal.

Details were sought on the reasons for granting the appeal, and in response to queries it was confirmed judicial review was the only option for challenging the appeal decision on a point of law.

Officers were also thanked for their work on the Newby Acre appeal, 15/10378/FUL, which since the papers were received the refusal had been upheld on appeal.

Resolved:

To note the update.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

Removal of conditions 2 & 3 of planning permission K/44735 to allow full time independent residential occupation of the holiday let.

Public Participation

Mrs Mary Rhodes, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Mr Peter Crozier, agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Planning Officer, Nick Clark, presented a report which recommended permission be refused for removal of conditions for the property known as ‘Kestrel Cottage’ which would allow full time independent residential occupation of the current holiday let. Key issues included the narrow access, location outside the village boundary and conflicts with national and local planning policy for sustainable buildings in the countryside as detailed in the report.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to address the Committee with their views, as detailed above.

The local unitary division member, Councillor Stuart Wheeler, then spoke in support of the application. He felt the application was directly comparable with an allowed scheme for application 15/05858/FUL and consistency with that was needed. He stated the impact on allowing the cottage to be let for longer periods would be no different to its current use, the village was easily accessible across the canal, no objections had been received and the parish council were in favour.

The Committee then debated the application. It was discussed whether there were sufficient similarities to the referenced application that was approved, or whether in this case the national and local policies were clear that the existing use was viable, and whether alternate uses had been explored before removal of the conditions was sought. Comparisons were also made to an appeal dismissed in 2015 at Chute Cadley.

A motion to refuse the application in line with the officer’s recommendation was moved by Councillor Mark Connolly, seconded by Councillor Richard Gamble. At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved:

Removal of condition 2 of planning application E/2012/0670/FUL, to allow for full-time rental occupation of a building converted for holiday accommodation.

The Planning Officer, Nick Clark, presented a report which recommended permission be refused for removal of conditions for the property known as ‘Clock Tower Cottage’ which would allow full time independent residential occupation of the current holiday let. Key issues, as with the other cottage at the site, included the narrow access, location outside the village boundary and conflicts with national and local planning policy for sustainable buildings in the countryside as detailed in the report.

Members were given the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer.

As the issues for the application were very similar to the preceding application, following an opportunity for any members of the public to speak or additional debate, a motion was moved by Councillor Mark Connolly, seconded by Councillor Richard Gamble, to refuse the application in line with the officer’s recommendation.

Resolved:

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.