Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies were received from Cllr Peter Evans who was substituted at the meeting by Cllr Chris Williams, and from Cllr Jerry Kunkler who was substituted at the meeting by Cllr James Sheppard.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 28 January 2016.

Resolved

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 January 2016 as a true and accurate record.

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

There were no declarations of interest received.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no 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 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 Thursday 3 March 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.

The Chairman noted the rules on public participation and that there were no questions submitted.

A report by the Case Officer is attached.

The following person spoke against the proposal

Mr Gallagher of The Ramblers Association

The following people spoke in support of the proposal

Mrs Sally Johnson, the applicant.

Mr Michael Wood, the agent.

Mr Tony Prior, a local resident.

Cllr Andy Knowles, Chairman Baydon Parish Council.

The Rights of Way Officer introduced the report which recommended that the Order be forwarded to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for determination.

The Rights of Way Officer referred Members to the Diversion Route map as detailed on page 59 of the agenda pack, and it was explained that the existing route was unavailable for use as it was obstructed by garden fencing and hedging. It was further explained that the alternate route shown as ‘Y-X’ on the diversion route map was initially proposed, but was not taken forward as the land owners’ were not in agreement.

The Officer advised that the proposed ‘E-F-G’ route satisfied the legal tests for the making of a Diversion Order under Section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, and there had been no new evidence submitted during the formal objection period that would lead Wiltshire Council to no longer support the making of the Order.

The Committee was then invited to ask technical questions, for which there were none.

Members of the public were then invited to speak, as detailed above.

Within debate the views of local residents, as detailed by the Parish Council, were noted and it was encouraging that the applicants had considered the views and opinions of local residents.

Resolved

To forward “The Wiltshire Council Baydon 2 (part) and 11 (part) Diversion Order and Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order 2015 to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for determination, with a recommendation from Wiltshire Council that the Order be confirmed with a modification to the statement for Baydon 11 to replace text missing in Part 3.  After “...at its junction with Baydon 30” add “where BRIDLEWAY leading south for approximately 60 metres to its junction with Baydon path no. 2.”

To receive details of the completed and pending appeals.

The Committee received a report which set out details of completed and pending appeals. The Chairman drew attention to the proceedings relating to application no. E/2013/0083/OUT, Land at Coate Bridge adjacent to Windsor Drive which was due to commence on 5 April 2016.

Resolved

To note the contents of the report.

To consider and determine the following planning applications.

A report by the Case Officer is attached.

The following people spoke in support of the application

Mr Howard Waters, the agent.

Mr Richard Jackson, the applicant.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application and noted that a letter and accompanying photograph had been presented to members of the Committee by the applicant since the agenda pack had been published.

It was explained that the proposal was to replace a previously approved permission with a larger scale dwelling. It was noted that the Highways Officer had expressed concern with regard to adequate parking at the site, and had raised an objection to the application on that basis. The officer’s report concluded that the application should be refused on the basis that the height, mass, bulk and design would have an adverse impact on both the setting of nearby listed buildings and the conservation area; and would be in contrary to Sections 7 and 12 of the NPPF and policies CP57 and CP58 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy.

The Committee was then invited to ask technical questions, for which there were none.

Members of the public were then invited to speak, as detailed above.

The Divisional Member, Cllr Sue Evans, spoke in support of the application and explained that the application had received full support at a recent Town Council meeting in preference to the previous application. The Town Council were satisfied that the new proposal would not impact on the views of the Church or Castle, and that the quality of the building would reflect its surroundings. Cllr Evans advised that the proposed dwelling mirrored that of buildings in the town centre, and therefore fitted in with the imposing structure. Cllr Evans noted that the Highways Officer objected to the proposal on the grounds of parking, but this issue could be resolved and should not be a reason for refusal.

The Officer responded that the proposal, within the context of the surrounding buildings, would look out of character, and the previously approved design of a smaller scale building would be better suited and more appropriate within its surroundings.

During debate, it was noted that the previous design was a compromise, and that a lot of care and attention had been put into the new design in terms of fitting into the historic surrounding area. A concern was raised with regard to parking and vehicle access, and it was suggested a condition be included within the recommendation on that basis. It was also noted that the views of the Town Council should be taken on board in that they had a good understanding on what they believed to be suitable for their town.

It was also noted that the design was too grand for its setting and that the new design may look incongruous in context of the smaller bungalows surrounding it. Concern was also raised that the proposal did not meet CP57 in that it did not fit into the locality and was beyond what was appropriate for the location.

Resolved

To approve the application subject to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.1

A report by the Case Officer is attached.

The following people spoke against the application

Mrs Ann Earley, local resident.

Mr Bob Gordon, local resident.

Cllr Teresa Steele, Market Lavington Parish Council.

The following person spoke in support of the application

Mr Phil Easton, Architect.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application for the change of use and conversion of an existing Public House to two 3 bed dwellings, and the erection of one 2 bed dwelling to the rear side, with associated amenity space and parking.

The officer explained that there would be no adverse impact in terms of design or the impact on the conservation area, but it was noted that concerns had been raised with regard to access and as to whether the proposal would make a significant difference in terms of additional vehicle movements. The planning officer concluded that the scheme was considered to be of an acceptable design, having no adverse impact upon reasonable living conditions of the occupiers of adjoining residential properties. The officer’s report recommended that approval be granted with conditions, including that of a condition for a construction management plan to be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority before development could commence. 

The Committee was then invited to ask technical questions, for which there were none.

Members of the public were then invited to speak, as detailed above.

Cllr Gamble, Divisional Member, noted that the proposal would bring an old building back into use and the design was of an acceptable standard, but the one fundamental issue of access for vehicles was unsatisfactory and dangerous. Cllr Gamble advised that the proposal did not meet CP61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy, and would have a severe impact upon the safety of road users and pedestrians.

During debate, it was noted that a decision to encourage additional vehicle movement would be unwise, and that the height of the dwelling was a potential over development which could have an adverse impact on neighbours.

After discussion,

Resolved

To refuse the application for the following reasons:

The access by reason of its restricted width, height and inadequate visibility is such that it makes manoeuvring into and out of the site difficult and dangerous having a severe impact upon the safety of road users and pedestrians on Church Street. The proposed development is therefore not capable of being served by a safe access to the highway network contrary to Core Policy 61 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015 and to Paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

A report by the Case Officer is attached.

The following person spoke against the application

Mr Stephen Martin, local resident.

The following person spoke in support of the application

Mr Mark Pettitt, representing the planning agent.

The Senior Planning Officer presented the application and reported that he had received a communication from the County Ecologist withdrawing objections to the proposal since publication of the agenda.

The officer explained that the proposed dwelling would increase the floor space by 190% compared to the original area, which would be in contrary to Policy HC25 of the Kennet Local Plan listed in Annex D of the Wiltshire Core Strategy.  It was explained that the proposed dwelling would be detrimental to the landscape as its height, size and positioning would impact on the scenic quality of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), and would conflict with CP51 and CP57 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy. The officer’s report therefore recommended that the application be refused.

The Committee was then invited to ask technical questions, for which there were none.

Members of the public were then invited to speak, as detailed above.

During debate it was noted that members of the committee were in agreement to the planning officer’s recommendation in that the proposal was not suitable for its setting and would have a detrimental impact on the AONB, and the proposed increase of 190% to the floor space was in conflict with the policies of the development plan.

After discussion,

Resolved

To refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

1       The scale of the replacement dwelling and garage is significantly larger than the original structure. As such, it does not comply with the terms of saved Policy HC25 of the Kennet Local Plan listed in Annex D of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015.

2       By reason of its height, size, scale and positioning in the open landscape the proposed dwelling would have a detrimental impact upon the landscape character and scenic quality of the area and the North Wessex Downs AONB. There are no material circumstances sufficient to justify approval that outweigh the conflict with Core Policies 51 and 57 of the Wiltshire Core Strategy 2015, to Supplementary Planning Guidance contained within the Wiltshire Landscape Character Assessment (2005) and with central government policy contained within Section 11 of the NPPF.

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.