If you are reading this page using a screenreader, we support ARIA landmarks for quick navigation too

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Online

Contact: Lisa Moore  Email: lisa.moore@wiltshire.gov.uk

Media

Items
No. Item

63.

Apologies

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from:

 

·       Cllr Mike Hewitt

·       Cllr George Jeans

 

64.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 25 June 2020.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 25 June 2020 were presented for consideration, and it was,

 

Resolved:

 

To approve and sign the minutes as a true and correct record.

 

65.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

Councillor Leo Randall declared a non-pecuniary interest in applications 19/11239/FUL & 19/11801/LBC by virtue of being a member of Whiteparish Parish Council, which had previously considered the applications. He stated he would reconsider the application with an open mind and not predetermine the matter. Cllr Randal participated in the discussion and vote on this item.

66.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Minutes:

The Chairman explained the procedure should a recess be required.

67.

Public Participation

The Council welcomes contributions from members of the public. During the ongoing Covid-19 situation the Council is operating revised procedures and the public are able participate in meetings online after registering with the officer named on this agenda, and in accordance with the deadlines below.

 

Guidance on how to participate in this meeting online.

 

Statements

 

Members of the public who wish to submit a statement in relation to an item on this agenda should submit this is electronically to the officer named on this agenda no later than 5pm on Monday 24 August 2020.

 

State whom the statement is from (including if representing another person or organisation), state points clearly and be readable aloud in approximately 3 minutes. Up to three speakers are allowed for each item on the agenda.

 

Questions

?

Those wishing to ask questions are required to give notice of any such questions electronically to the officer named on the front of this agenda no later than 5pm on Thursday 20 August 2020 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 Monday 24 August 2020.

 

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 members prior to the meeting and made available at the meeting and on the Council’s website; they will be taken as read at the meeting.

Minutes:

The committee noted the rules on public participation.

68.

Planning Appeals and Updates

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate for the period of 13/06/2019 to 13/08/2020.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The Chairman moved that the Committee note the contents of the appeals report included within the agenda pack and requested that any questions be made to officers outside of the meeting. As such, it was:

 

Resolved

 

To note the appeals report for the period of 13/06/20 to 13/08/20.

 

69.

Planning Applications

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

70.

20/02825/FUL - 2 Lower Mooray, Chilmark, SP3 5BA

To erect a detached outbuilding, housing double garage with office space to the side, consolidate access and associated works.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Sarah Miller (adjacent resident) spoke in objection of the application.

Richard Packer and Lucy Packer/Neville-Rolfe (owners of 1 Lower Mooray) provided a statement in objection which was read out by the DSO.

Francesca Mathieu, (owner of the property), spoke in support of the application.

 

Councillor Bev Small, on behalf of Chilmark Parish Council, spoke in objection of the application. For clarity, it was noted that the Chairman of Chilmark PC, Cllr Richard Packer had not participated in any meetings where the Parish council had discussed the application. 

 

James Repper, Planning Officer, presented the application which was for the erection of a detached outbuilding, housing a double garage with office space to the side and to consolidate access and associated works. The application was recommended for approval with conditions as detailed in the Officer report.

 

Key issues highlighted included: principle of development; scale, design, impact to character, AONB and appearance of the area; and residential amenity and living conditions.

 

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. In response to queries, it was clarified that the surface material for the proposed driveway was yet to be stipulated but would be conditioned to be non-porous to prevent any surface water flow onto the single-track lane. Officers confirmed that the garden area was part of the residential curtilage and clarified that extension policies included outbuildings or proposals detached from the main property.

 

Members of the public, as detailed above, then had the opportunity to speak on the application.

 

Concerns were raised regarding the hedging encircling the application site and the dimensions of the proposed outbuilding to which officers reiterated the sizes and noted that due to the proposed roofing material, the height and angle of the roof was to compensate for this specific material and could not be altered in order to be in keeping with the AONB. 

 

Local member Cllr Bridget Wayman spoke in objection of the application and noted her support of the Chilmark Parish Council’s statement of objection. Cllr Wayman acknowledged the alterations and reductions in the size of the application but noted that the pictures and proposed site plans appeared to misrepresent the dimensions and size of the area. Reference was made to the age of the property and historical significance for the village, Cllr Wayman requested a condition be added to the application, if approved, to ensure the protection of any mature trees from damage or removal during the development.

 

The Chair, Cllr Fred Westmoreland, moved a motion to approve the application in line with officer recommendations, including any conditions, which Cllr Christopher Devine seconded.

 

In the ensuing debate, members considered the existing car parking arrangements and the increasing move towards home working in the current climate. The Committee queried the size of the outbuilding, where it was confirmed that the revised dimensions of the double garage were considered to be a standard size with the majority of the structure hidden behind the encircling hedging.

 

The Committee asked for clarification  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70.

71.

19/11239/FUL & 19/11801/LBC - Dairy House Farm, Romsey Road, Whiteparish, SP5 2SF

Proposed new swimming pool and outbuilding, new orangery and single storey link to existing lean-to accommodation, installation of new gates, retrospective addition of lean-to, summerhouse and decking.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Peter Claydon (neighbouring residents) spoke in objection of the application.

Claire and Jason Wooldridge (neighbouring residents) spoke in objection to the application.

Shaun Wylie (applicant) provided a statement in support which was read out by the DSO

Maria Pennington (Clerk to Whiteparish Parish Council) spoke in objection to the application.

 

Richard Hughes, Development Management Team Leader, introduced a report on behalf of planning officer Christos Chrysanthou, which recommended approval, subject to conditions.The proposals were for a new swimming pool and outbuilding; orangery; single storey link to existing lean-to accommodation; installation of new gates; and retrospective additions of a lean-to storage area, summerhouse and decking.

 

Officers clarified the areas of proposed development and retrospective developments on the application site plans and noted that as the original main property was a listed building. It was noted that members would need to vote on both the planning application and the listed building consent separately.

 

Key issues highlighted included: principle of development; scale, sitting, design and impact on amenity, noise, the setting, landscape character and character of the listed building; highways; and drainage.

 

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. In response to queries surrounding the number of retrospective applications, officers noted that they were made aware of the previous developments upon site visits and as such included them within this application retrospectively for ease and efficiency. It was clarified for members which areas of development would be removed from the site if the application were to be refused. 

 

Members of the public, as detailed above, had the opportunity to speak on the application.

 

The meeting was adjourned from 16:24pm to 16:27pm to allow for members to re-join following technical difficulties due to an electrical storm.

 

Local member Cllr Richard Britton spoke in objection of the application and cited the complexity of the application with reference to the amount of retrospective applications, resubmissions and amendments spanning over the course of several months. Cllr Britton noted his surprise of the Conservation Officer’s non-objection. The perceived cumulative overdevelopment of the property was highlighted with reference made to Core Policy’s 57 and 58 and Saved Policy’s C24 and H31, and the local context of the property which was considered to be open countryside. Issues in regard to the drainage system were raised and feelings of frustration surrounding the arrangements and process that involved the Environmental Agency were noted.

 

A motion to refuse the application on the basis of not meeting Core Policy’s 57 and 58 and Saved Policy’s C24 and H31 was moved by Cllr Richard Britton, which was seconded by Cllr Leo Randall.

 

Members debated the overdevelopment of the site and the diminution of the original listed building, and whether each of the development areas in turn were intrusive or not to neighbours. Concerns were raised as to the materials used for construction of the lean-to accommodation to which officers clarified were stipulated to be removed and changed to more suitable materials if approved.

 

The main  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

72.

Urgent Items

Any other items of business which, in the opinion of the Chairman, should be taken as a matter of urgency 

 

Minutes:

There were no urgent items.

 

The Chairman informed Members that site visits were now taking place again.

 

Actions

Search

This website