Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mark Connolly. Councillor Connolly was substituted by Councillor James Sheppard.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 3 April 2014.

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 April 2014 were presented for consideration, and it was,

Resolved:

That subject to amending Minute 19 to read ‘Mr Peter Gallagher spoke on behalf of the Ramblers Association in objection to the Officer’s Recommendation’, 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 James Sheppard declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 14/02863/FUL: St John’s Marlborough, Granham Hill, by virtue of having two children in attendance at the school who could possibly attend the Sixth Form there. He confirmed he would consider the application on its merits with an open mind and would debate and vote on the item.

Councillors Stewart Dobson and Nick Fogg also declared non-pecuniary interests in application 14/02863/FUL by virtue of being members of Marlborough Town Council, who had considered the application previously. Neither had voted at the Town Council meeting and would consider the application on its merits with an open mind, and would debate and vote on the item.

Councillor Richard Gamble also declared a non-pecuniary interest in application 14/02863/FUL by virtue of being the Council’s Portfolio Holder for Schools, Skills and Youth, but stressed that the Council was not responsible for post-16 education provision of academies, and was therefore able to consider the application on its merits with an open mind, and would debate and vote on the item.

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 on Wednesday 28 May 2014. 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 rules on public participation were noted.

There were no questions or statements submitted.

To receive details of the completed and pending appeals.

A report from the Area Development Manager on the outcome of appeals arising from Committee and Officer determined applications for 2013 was presented.

Resolved:

To note the update.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

The following applications were determined:

Public Participation

Mr Alan Titcombe, resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Gordon Hutt, Chairman of Ducks Meadow Residents Association, spoke in objection to the application.

Mrs Debbie Lorraine, Ducks Meadow Residents Association, spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Martin Cook, Assistant Head Marlborough St John’s, spoke in support of the application.

Miss Ellen Trevaskiss, pupil, spoke in support of the application.

Mrs Karen Davis, applicant and Chief Financial Officer of Marlborough St John’s, spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Justin Cook, Marlborough Town Council, spoke in objection to the application.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced the application which recommended the application be granted. Key issues were stated to include the design of the proposed building and any impact on nearby residential amenity and traffic impacts, particularly off-site parking. Details were provided of late representations in objection and support of the application.

A correction was made to the officer report, which had stated “To meet current parking standards the proposal should be looking to meet a maximum number of around 126 spaces for staff and pupils for the sixth form requirement of 1 space per 4 students”. It was stated that the proper ratio is 1 space per 10 students applied to the new build, which with spaces for associated staff and parents gives a requirement for 14 spaces.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Further clarification was sought on national and council parking standards, and details that would need to be provided in an updated school Travel Plan, which it was confirmed would need to be completed by March 2015. In response to queries over the location of the proposed build, it was stated that the presence of a gas pipe running under the site limited where construction of the new extension could take place.

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

The local member, Councillor Nick Fogg, then spoke in support of the application, while expressing disappointment that a Travel Plan to resolve parking concerns had not already been completed.

Cllr Jemima Milton, adjoining Division Member, then spoke in support of the application, highlighting the need for the school to expand and its importance to the town and wider area.

A debate followed, where the procedure for completion of the Travel Plan was discussed, and that it would be beneficial for the Marlborough Division Members to be consulted on its development.

Parking capacity on the site was raised, as well as the impact of students parking in the nearby residential streets, with options such as more spaces on the site, overflow parking sites, designated spacing for students and a resident’s parking scheme discussed. Members were informed of a former Wiltshire Council education facility near to the site had existing parking facilities, and senior officers had been contacted to determine whether this could be utilised by the school, with a positive initial  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Public Participation

Mr David Johnson, applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Mr Lance Beale, resident, spoke in support of the application,

The Senior Planning Officer introduced a report which recommended the application be refused. The key issue was stated to be the impact on highway safety of the development undertaken and which would be approved by variance of the existing conditions on the site. It was stated that the grinding down of the existing kerbs had damaged their structural integrity and was dangerous, and the council could be liable for any damage or injury that resulted.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on the cost of replacing the type of kerbs required with the existing conditions and in response to queries it was confirmed the increased scale of the access would be an improvement to the highway, if proper kerbing and appropriately wide consolidated material rather than looser materials, was in place.

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

The local member, Councillor Liz Bryant, and adjoining Division Member, Councillor Jonathon Seed, then spoke in support of the application, stating that the current access was safe and of common use in the area. The site was for private not commercial use, and it was questioned why a commercial standard had been requested for the width of the consolidated material.

A debate followed, where the importance of following appropriate standards was emphasised, and that though not a commercially used site, traffic through it was quite frequent and included heavy vehicles which could cause damage as a result of the lack of compliance to the original conditions.

At the conclusion of discussion, it was,

Resolved:

That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

1.      The proposed variation of conditions 3 and 4 of planning permission E/09/1558/FUL would result in an adverse impact on highway safety. The conditions as originally worded are necessary to ensure no detriment to structure of the existing highway, and to ensure vehicles can safely enter and exit the application site without detriment to the free flow of traffic and highway safety along the A3102 road. The proposed development would therefore be contrary to saved policy PD1 of the Kennet Local Plan 2011 and Core Policies 60 and 62 of the emerging Wiltshire Core Strategy.

There were no urgent items.