Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Peter Colmer (who was substituted by Cllr Bill Douglas), Cllr Christine Crisp and Cllr Alan Hill.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 01 June 2011 (copy herewith).

Resolved:

To confirm and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 June 2011.

Cllr Peter Doyle declared a personal interest in Minute No 63 (b) – Application No 09/01844/S73A – Westwood Farm, Rode Hill, Near Colerne, Wiltshire, SN14 8AR – Alterations and Formation of A Private Way for Agricultural Purposes, and Installation of Associated Access Gates and Railings off Road Hill (Retrospective) because he was a member of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty Joint Advisory Committee.  He stated that he would take part in the debate and vote with an open mind. 

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. Those wishing to ask questions are required to give notice of any such questions in writing to the officer named above (acting on behalf of the Director of Resources) no later than 5pm on Thursday 09 June 2011. Please contact the officer named on the first page 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 addressed the Committee as set out in Minute No 63 below.

There were no questions received from members of the public or members of the Council.

An appeals update report is attached for information.

The Committee received and noted a report setting out details of:-

(i)            Forthcoming hearings and public inquiries between 9 June and 30 September 2011.

(ii)          Planning appeals received between 19 May and 9 June 2011.

(iii)         Planning appeals decided between 19 May and 9 June 2011.

The following person spoke in favour of the proposal

Mr Paul Kalbskopf, the applicant

The Committee received a presentation by the Case Officer which set out the main issues in respect of the application.  She introduced the report which recommended that planning permission be refused.  She also drew Members’ attention to the late items from which it was noted that the Highways Officer had raised no objections subject to conditions.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions after which the Committee received a statement from the applicant in support of the planning application.

Members heard the views of Cllr Chris Caswill, the local member, in favour of the application.

After discussion,

Resolved:

To refuse planning permission for the following reasons:-

1.         The proposed garage and store / workshop by reason of its scale, design and siting would result in an incongruous feature on the street scene of both the cul de sac and Maud Heath’s Causeway to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area.  Such impact is compounded by the direct and indirect loss of trees to facilitate the development. The proposal thus fails to accord with Policies C3, H8 and NE14 of the North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011.

2.         The scale and siting of the garage would also have an overbearing impact on the southern aspect of the neighbouring Millcott property contrary to Policies C3 and H8 of the North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011.

The following person spoke against the proposal

Cllr Philip Rayner, representing Box Parish Council

The following person spoke in favour of the proposal

Mr Jonathan Reiney, the agent

The Committee received a presentation by the Case Officer which set out the main issues in respect of the application.  She introduced the report which recommended that the application be delegated to the Area Development Manager to approve subject to receipt of comments from the Environment Agency and conditions.  She also drew Members’ attention to the late items from which it was noted that the Environment Agency had raised no objections but recommended that a package of protection and mitigation measures be secured in respect of the damage caused to the ecological habitat from the unauthorised development.

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 the planning application.

Members heard the views of Cllr Sheila Parker, the local member, objecting to the application.

After discussion,

Resolved:

To grant planning permission for the following reason:-

The proposed development is considered to be an appropriate form of development in the Green Belt that will not have a significant detrimental impact upon the landscape, ecology or hydrology of the area.  Subject to the imposition of appropriately worded planning conditions, the proposal would comply with the provisions of Policies C3, NE1, NE4, NE7, NE10, NE23 of the adopted North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011 and guidance contained in PPG2 and PPS9.

Subject to the following conditions:

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in accordance with the submitted plans and documents listed below. No variation from the approved plans should be made without the prior approval of the local planning authority. Amendments may require the submission of a further application.

Planning, Design and Access Statement (including Agricultural Access Track plans BRS.2189_02-1b) dated October 2009

Landscape Visual Impact Assessment (dated February 2010)

Hydrology Report (dated August 2010)

County Wildlife Site Management Plan 2011 - 2015 (dated April 2011)

REASON: To ensure that the development is implemented as approved.

2. All nine County Wildlife Sites, (namely Draught Wood, Draught Wood Downland, Ryder's Wood and Breach, Ryder's Wood North, Medley's Wood Downland, Sidney Farm Fields-Northern Parcel, Sidney Farm Fields-Southern Parcel, Westwood Farm Down, and Westwood Farm Down East), shall be managed in complete accordance with the submitted County Wildlife Management Plan 2011 – 2015 (prepared by The Landmark Practice – dated April 2011), and the 5 year action plan that is incorporated in that plan.  Any monitoring reports produced as part of the required annual monitoring programme shall be made available to the Local Planning Authority upon request.

Reason:  In the interests of securing the required biodiversity mitigation and compensation measures following the damage caused by the proposed works and so as to secure future management of the County Wildlife Sites to the benefit of local ecology.

The following people spoke against the proposal:

Cllr Roger Budgen, representing St Paul Malmesbury Without Parish Council and Malmesbury & St Paul Without Residents' Association

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mr Andrew Carnegie

Mr Ian Rae, the agent

Mr David Henry, the applicant

The Committee received a presentation by the Case Officer which set out the main issues in respect of the application.  She introduced the report which recommended that the planning application be refused. She also 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 the planning application.

Members then heard the views of Cllr John Thomson, the local member in support of the application.

After discussion,

Resolved:

To refuse planning permission for the following reason:-

Non compliance with condition 11 of 06/03236/FUL and construction of a 700mm high wall would lead to the resulting development, associated deliveries and, notably, the parking and display of vehicles, being overly visible and prominent in the countryside contrary to policies C3 and NE15 of the North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011.

The following people spoke against the proposal:

Cllr Roger Budgen, representing St Paul Malmesbury Without Parish Council and Malmesbury & St Paul Without Residents' Association

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mr Andrew Carnegie

Mr Ian Rae, the agent

Mr David Henry, the applicant

The Committee received a presentation by the Case Officer which set out the main issues in respect of the application.  She introduced the report which recommended that the planning application be refused.

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 the planning application.

Members then heard the views of Cllr John Thomson, the local member in support of the application.

After discussion,

Resolved:

To refuse planning permission for the following reason:-

The sign due to its size, position and illumination would be an incongruous, intrusive and overtly commercial feature in the countryside to the detriment of the amenity of the area and contrary to policies C3, NE15 and BD9 of the North Wiltshire Local Plan 2011.

The following people spoke in favour of the proposal:

Mrs Miranda Winram, the applicant

Mr Roger Bugden, representing Malmesbury & St Paul Without Residents’ Association

Cllr Bill Blake, representing Malmesbury Town Council

The Committee received a presentation by the Case Officer which set out the main issues in respect of the application.  She introduced the report which recommended that the planning application be refused. She also 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 the planning application.

After discussion,

Resolved:

To delegate to the Area Development Manager to grant permission subject to conditions to be drafted by Officers in respect of the detailing of the windows and the internal alterations.

For the following reason:

The proposed alterations to the listed building are considered to preserve the architectural and historic interest of the heritage asset.  The new timber windows are considered be more sympathetic to the overall appearance of the building although the detailed design of the windows will need to be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.  The proposals are considered to comply with the requirements of The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the policies contained within PPS5.

There were no urgent items.