Agenda and minutes

To receive any members’ apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Jane Burton (substituted by Cllr Jeffery Ody).

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 12 August 2010 (copy herewith).

Minutes from the previous meeting held on 12 August 2010 were presented and it was,

Resolved:

To approve and sign the minutes as a correct record.

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

Councillor Philip Brown declared a personal interest with regard to his knowing an objector to an application to be considered, although this acquaintanceship was some twenty years ago.

The Chairman drew attention to a typing error on the Agenda frontsheet, which incorrectly listed Councillor Francis Morland as a member of the Committee. The Chairman confirmed that this was not the case.

Members of the public who wish to speak either in favour or against an application 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. 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.

The Committee noted the rules on public participation and the manner in which the meeting would proceed.

To receive details of the completed and pending appeals (copy herewith).

The Committee noted the list of appeals determined between 01/04/2010 and 30/09/2010.

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

E/10/0374/FUL Full planning application for the demolition of existing farmhouse and farmbuildings and the erection of a replacement dwelling and 10 additional houses (4 affordable), together with a new access and associated works at Ropewind Farm, Rivar Road, SHALBOURNE SN8 3PU

The following people spoke against the proposal:

Mr Mike Lockhart, a local resident.

Mr Pollitt, a local resident.

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mr Michael Fowler, the architect.

Ms Claire Glasspoole, the landscape architect.

Mrs Zweck, of Shalbourne Parish Council.

Cllr Stuart Wheeler, the local member.

The Committee received a presentation by the Area Development Manager which set out the main issues in respect of the application.

He introduced the report, which recommended approval, and drew members’ attention to the late items.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions, after which the Committee received statements from members of the public as detailed above, expressing their views regarding this planning application.

After discussion regarding:

·        The proposed density of development;

·        The proposed access works;

·        The level of affordable housing provision; and

·        The removal of trees on the site

It was,

Resolved:

That planning permission be granted subject to the applicant entering into a S106 agreement to deliver the affordable housing and to make a financial contribution towards children’s play space in the village.

For the following reason:

The site lies within the Limits of Development of the village set out in the Kennet Local Plan and the scale of the residential development proposed is in accordance with policy HC22 of the Local Plan. The sensitive development of the site proposed in the scheme, with its layout, house design and materials and the integration with existing landscape features, enhanced by additional planting will ensure that the proposal preserves and enhances the character and appearance of the conservation area and the landscape of the area of outstanding natural beauty and will not have any significant adverse impact on the amenity of local residents. The proposal therefore accords with policy PD1 of the Kennet Local Plan. Although there will be a number of trees felled to accommodate the development, the replacement planting will help mitigate this loss and will contribute to the biodiversity of the area, in line with policy NR4 of the local Plan. The affordable housing proposed will help meet local needs, in accordance with policies HC28 and 32 of the Kennet Local plan and at the level proposed can be accommodated without any adverse impact on the overall character and appearance of the area.

And subject to the following conditions:

1.          The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years of 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 take place until details of the materials to be used for the external walls and roofs (including samples)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89a

The following people spoke against the proposal:

Mr Anthony McNicholas, a local resident.

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mr Russ Buck, Secretary of Burbage & Easton Royal Cricket Club.

Mr Marek Grabowski, Chairman of Burbage & Easton Royal Cricket Club.

Mr Paul Lavis, Head of Coaching at Burbage & Easton Roayl Cricket Club.

Cllr Stuart Wheeler, the local member.

The Committee received a presentation by the Area Development Manager which set out the main issues in respect of the application.

He introduced the report, which recommended approval, and drew members’ attention to the late items.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions, after which the Committee received statements from members of the public as detailed above, expressing their views regarding this planning application.

After discussion regarding:

• The proposed use of the land
• Potential highways impact of the development
• The effect on local amenity of the development

It was,

Resolved:

That planning permission be granted subject to the following conditions:

1.            The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years of 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 loudspeakers, public address system, or other amplification equipment shall be used on the site.

REASON:

In order to protect the amenities of nearby residential properties

3.            No external lighting (including any floodlighting) shall be erected or installed anywhere within the site or anywhere outside of the site for the purposes of lighting any part of the site.

REASON:

In the interests of visual and neighbour amenity.

4.            This decision relates to documents/plans submitted with the application, listed below. No variation from the approved documents should be made without the prior approval of this Council. Amendments may require the submission of a further application.  Failure to comply with this advice may lead to enforcement action which may require alterations and/or demolition of any unauthorised buildings or structures and may also lead to prosecution.

Plan Ref: Site Location Plan received on the 12th August 2010 and the Proposed Use of Glebe Field Block Plan received on the 1st October 2010.

5.            INFORMATIVE TO APPLICANT:

The applicant is requested to note that public footpath 'Burbage 6' transects Glebe Field and that nothing in this permission shall authorise the diversion, obstruction, or stopping up of any right of way that crosses the site.  A separate application under the Town and Country Planning or Highway Acts would be necessary.

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mr Robert Budden, a local resident.

The Committee received a presentation on behalf of the Case Officer which set out the main issues in respect of the application and introduced the report, which recommended approval.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions, after which the Committee received statements from members of the public as detailed above, expressing their views regarding this planning application.

After discussion regarding:

·        The principle of the alteration

·        Impact on the local street scene

·        Local reaction to the alteration

It was,

Resolved:

That listed building consent is granted for the following reason:

The proposed building works have not had an adverse impact on the character or appearance of the building and this part of the Devizes Conservation Area.

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mr Jon Payne, the Applicant’s Solicitor.

The Committee received a presentation by the Rights of Way Officer, which set out the main issues in respect of the application and the scope and purpose of the decision to be made.

She introduced the report of the Corporate Director, Neighbourhood and Planning, which recommended referral to the Secretary of State for determination, with a recommendation for approval.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions, after which the Committee received statements from members of the public as detailed above, expressing their views regarding this application.

After discussion regarding:

• The effect on views available to users of the bridleway
• The distance and convenience of the proposed diversion
• The effect on the occupants of the immediate residence

It was,

Resolved:

That the Orders be referred to the Secretary of State for determination with the recommendation that they be confirmed as made, for the following reasons:

1.            The proposed diversion meets the tests contained in Section 119 of The Highways Act 1980.

2.            The landowner has made it clear that he will only wish to dedicate the proposed new route to the public as a restricted byway if the Diversion Order is confirmed. This is considered reasonable. Additionally, Wiltshire Council would not wish to expand its rights of way network by having two routes in such close proximity with additional maintenance responsibilities.

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.