Venue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, Monkton Park, Chippenham, SN15 1ER. View directions
Contact: Cameron Osborn
To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.
Apologies for absence were received by Councillor Chuck Berry.
Minutes of the Previous Meeting
To approve as a true and correct record the minutes of the previous meeting held on Wednesday 26 April 2023.
To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 26 April 2023 as a true and correct record.
Declarations of Interest
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.
The Chairman noted the fire alarm procedure.
The Council welcomes contributions from members of the public.
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 will 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 prior to the meeting. Lobbying once the debate has started at the meeting is not permitted, including the circulation of new information, written or photographic which have not been verified by planning officers.
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 [change this to the day which is 4 clear working days before the meeting – eg Wednesday before a Wednesday meeting] 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 [change this to the day which is 2 clear working days before the meeting – eg fridaybefore a Wednesday meeting]. 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.
Planning Appeals and Updates
To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate.
The Committee considered the Planning Appeals and Updates report from 21 June 2023.
Councillor Steve Bucknell congratulated planning officers for the dismissal of the appeal for Application 20/11655/FUL at Brynards Hill in Royal Wootton Bassett.
To note the planning appeals and updates report from 21 June 2023.
PL/2022/05273: Land at Marsh Farm, North of Malmesbury Road, Royal Wootton Bassett, SN4 8ER
Proposal: erection of Class E food store, car parking, works to create community open space, new access, landscaping and associated works.
Planning Officer Olivia Tresise took the Committee through the planning application from Lidl as detailed in the report in the agenda pack. The application was for the proposed erection of a Class E food store, with car parking, works to create community open space, new access, landscaping, and other associated works. The Planning Officer highlighted details including the location of Marsh Farm Hotel, a grade II listed building adjacent to the site, the three-story care home recently built to the east of it, the two-story residential property opposite and the sports grounds to the northwest. She also drew the Committee’s attention to the recently agreed conditions that were not outlined in the report relating to electric vehicle parking and weekend opening hours.
Members sought clarity on the situation surrounding foul water sewage, citing similar problems in the care home adjacent to the site. The Committee discussed the likely effectiveness of imposing Grampian conditions to ensure sufficient measures were taken regarding foul water sewage prior to commencement, referencing a tendency for developers to ignore such conditions.
The Chairman then invited members of the public to speak to the application:
· Daniel Preece spoke in support of the application on behalf of Lidl.
· Councillor Steve Walls spoke on behalf of Royal Wootton Bassett Town Council.
The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Bucknell, spoke to the application, expressing dissatisfaction with the proposed location of the site and sharing his concerns regarding the proposed country park behind the food store. He referenced recent problems with similar proposals, and pointed out that furthermore, the applicant did not own the land in question. He also expressed scepticism as to the future of the development, pointing out the potential for further residential development. He suggested that the possibility for proper consultation with local councils and organisations on how best to use the land behind the food store had been passed up, and concluded by acknowledging that the Committee could only consider what was in front of them today but recommending that harsh conditions are imposed to restrict future development as best they could.
The Planning Officer pointed out Conditions 14 and 15 in the Officer Report could be used in relation to the parkland area, but Councillor Bucknell reiterated his concerns that since the applicant did not own the land in question, they could potentially evade any repercussions for not complying with the conditions.
Councillor Gavin Grant warned of the dangers involved in improvising conditions, and after consulting with the Chairman, moved to defer the item for three cycles until clarity on such issues as foul water sewage and the parkland could be provided. Councillor Howard Greenman seconded the motion.
Councillor Brian Mathew suggested the Committee consider imposing a condition ensuring safe and adequate pedestrian access from across the road, and the Committee discussed the speed limit of the road in front of the site. Councillor Jacqui Lay pointed out that the road was part of the official diversion route from the A419 and was a lorry route when ... view the full minutes text for item 43.
PL/2022/08432: Corner House, The Common, Heddington, Calne, Wiltshire, SN11 0NZ
Proposal: extension and outbuildings. Change of use of land for residential purposes.
PL/2022/08432: Corner House, The Common, Heddington, Calne, Wiltshire, SN11 0NZ (Pages 73 - 84)
Development Manager Team Leader Simon Smith presented a report on the next item, explaining the proposal for an extension and outbuildings to Corner House on The Common, as well as a change of use of land for residential purposes. He detailed that the land that’s use was to be changed was situated to the rear of the property, which was itself in open countryside close to Heddington. The Team Leader also pointed out two inaccuracies in the report, stating that the height increase referenced on page 77 was actually 0.6 metres rather than 0.9 metres, and that contrary to page 79, only one Juliet balcony was proposed rather than two. He concluded by stating that the officer recommendation was to grant planning permission subject to conditions.
The Committee sought clarity about the dimensions of the proposed extension and land, and Councillor Threlfall pointed out that contrary to page 78 in the report, the site was not in a conservation area, which the Team Leader confirmed was an error. In response to the Chairman’s enquiry about how the agricultural land being converted had been used recently, the Team Leader also stated that there was no definitive answer about the use of the land, but that it was nothing other than agricultural in planning terms, also emphasising that the applicant owned all the land in question.
The Chairman then invited members of the public to speak to the application.
· Councillor Adrian Foster spoke in objection to the application as a member of the public.
· Jonathan Llewellyn spoke in support of the application.
· Steven Leard spoke in support of the application.
· Councillor Geoff Dickerson spoke on behalf of Heddington Parish Council.
The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Sam Pearce-Kearney, spoke to the application, emphasising the view that residents on both sides of the debate had the right to be heard. He pointed out that local residents had highlighted a range of planning reasons for refusing planning permission, also noting that the report had identified a potential departure from Core Policy 57. He stated that a three-story building would likely be an unduly imposing presence on The Common, referencing the report’s verdict that the property would stand out if subject to such a substantial extension. Councillor Pearce-Kearney also noted that other proposals of a similar nature had been refused planning permission. He cited Core Policies 48 and 51 as other reasons for refusal, pointing out Heddington’s cultural identity and asserting that the loss of agricultural land would negatively impact the community and its heritage as well as local amenity.
Councillor Bucknell moved to grant planning permission subject to conditions and was seconded by the Chairman. In proposing the motion, Councillor Bucknell stated that as an antiques collector, he appreciated that old things can be ugly too, stating that Corner House was one such instance. He expressed his approval for the steps that the architect, Mr Llewellyn, had taken to ... view the full minutes text for item 44.
PL/2022/08804: Avondale, Brook End, Luckington, Chippenham, SN14 6PJ
Proposal: demolition of existing dwelling and erection of a four-bedroom dwelling with detached double garage.
Planning Officer Olivia Tresise took the Committee through the next item: the proposed demolition of the existing bungalow on site and the erection of a four-bedroom dwelling with a detached double garage. The Planning Officer pointed out that a listed building was situated nearby and that the site was in the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). She stated that the main point of contention was the proposed height of the property, but as the proposed height was lower than that of a previously approved application, the officer recommendation was to approve planning permission subject to conditions.
Councillor Bucknell sought clarity on the effect of the site being in Flood Zone 3, to which the Planning Officer confirmed that the proposed dwelling had no impact on the flood risk to either it or neighbouring properties. Councillor Martin Smith sought assurances as to whether the proposed ceiling heights were still satisfactory after the reduction to the proposed height of the building overall. Councillor Lay enquired as to the condition about the glazed window which distantly overlooked a neighbouring property, and suggested tightening the condition to ensure the window was not one which could simply to opened, thereby mitigating the condition entirely.
The Chairman then invited members of the public to speak to the application.
· Amy Hallett spoke in support of the application.
· Charlotte Reeves spoke in support of the application.
The Local Unitary Member, Councillor Martin Smith, explained that he had called in the application on behalf of Luckington Parish Council over concerns about the scale of the proposed dwelling, particularly its height. He explained that the Conservation Officer objected to the proportions, the construction materials, and the loss of trees. He stated that many of those concerns had now been mitigated by conditions and that he was now far more comfortable with the proposal in its present form.
Councillor Smith then moved to grant planning permission subject to conditions. Councillor Elizabeth Threlfall seconded the motion.
Councillor Bucknell stated that he would support the motion but added that he was not in favour of the building’s aesthetic. Councillor Threlfall suggested that the conditions pertaining to construction materials ensure that both windows and exterior doors make use of timber rather than more modern materials.
To grant planning permission subject to conditions.
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.