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

73.

Apologies

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from:

 

·       Cllr George Jeans who was substituted by Cllr Graham Wright

·       Cllr Mike Hewitt

 

74.

Minutes of the Previous Meeting

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 27 August 2020.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 27 August 2020 were presented.

 

Resolved:

 

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes.

 

75.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

In relation to application 20/05322/VAR (7c), Cllr Westmoreland noted that he had a past acquaintance with one of the public speakers. This was as the Chairman of local group of artists, which he was no longer chair of. Since that time, he had not had any other personal meetings with that person. Therefore, declared that he did not feel it affected his ability to take part in the discussion and vote on that item.

 

76.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

Minutes:

The Chairman explained the procedure should a recess be required.

 

77.

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 to 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

 

Access the online meeting here

 

Statements

Members of the public who wish to submit a statement in relation to an item on this agenda should submit this in writing to the officer named on this agenda no later than 5pm on 22 September 2020..

 

Submitted statements should:

·       State whom the statement is from (including if representing another person or organisation);

·       State clearly whether the statement is in objection to or support of the application;

·       Be readable aloud in approximately three minutes (for members of the public and statutory consultees) and in four minutes (for parish council representatives – 1 per parish council).

 

Up to three objectors and three supporters are normally allowed for each item on the agenda, plus statutory consultees and parish councils.

 

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 electronically to the officer named on the front of this agenda no later than 5pm on 22 September 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 24 September 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. Questions and answers will normally be taken as read at the meeting.

 

Minutes:

The committee noted the rules on public participation.

78.

Planning Appeals and Updates

To receive details of completed and pending appeals and other updates as appropriate.

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 August to 18 September 2020.

 

79.

Planning Applications

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

80.

19/11206/OUT: Land to the East of Wagtails, Southampton Road, Alderbury, SP5 3AF

Outline Application for up to 32 dwellings with all matters reserved (except access)

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Colin French read a statement in objection to the application

David Webb read a statement in objection to the application on behalf of Mrs Hexter

Ken Carley read a statement in objection to the application

Elaine Hartford (Chair) of Alderbury PC read a statement in objection of the application

 

Adam Madge, Planning Team Leader, presented the outline application for up to 32 dwellings with all matters reserved (except access) at land to the east of Wagtails, Southampton Road, Alderbury, SP5 3AF.

 

The Officer noted that following a protracted period of discussion and negotiation, the applicant had chosen to exercise their right to appeal against non-determination of the application. This meant that the Council no longer had the powers to formerly determine the application, as that power now lay with the Planning Inspectorate.

 

The view of the Committee was sought to enable the Council to make its case to the Inspector.

 

The presentation highlighted matters in relation to the principle and policy, the impact on residential amenity, highways systems, ecology, drainage, flooding and S106 and viability.

 

The application site was an L shaped parcel of greenfield land which was outside of the settlement boundary but was adjacent to it on three sides.

 

Trees and vegetation on the site had been cleared and developers were at present building houses on one side of the site near the entrance, which already had planning permission.

 

It was advised that the outline application, was an indicative plan only, and was not necessarily how the site would look when completed.

 

There were residential dwellings along three sides of the site and also a public footpath to one side.

 

Other house development had recently been approved around the site, with 50 houses at the back, which had gained permission on appeal, with construction not yet started.

 

Slide 6 detailed the plan for the different types of houses and the 40% affordable housing that the applicant has said would be included.

 

There was also a children’s play area and a greenspace. 

 

Existing dwellings on Southampton Road that backed on to the site would have views of the new houses proposed and would be the most impacted on by the development.

 

It was noted that although the report did not make much mention to CP1, the first reason for refusal did mention this and Officers were recommending refusal on that point, in that larger villages would only be developed to a certain extent.

 

The river Avon had been identified by Natural England (NE) as having too high levels of phosphate and NE had advised that applications which would add to those levels should not currently be approved.

 

The site was previously heavily covered with trees which had since been felled and removed. It was felt that a substantial number of trees and shrubs should be put back into the site, however and at present due to the number of proposed dwellings and layout, it was felt that this would not be possible.

 

It was also noted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

81.

20/02624/FUL: The Old Dairy, Church Road, Milston, SP4 8HT

Change of use of two adjoining agricultural buildings to form a single-family home. Demolition of a further barn and its replacement with a garage/workshop and associated works.

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Suzanne Kennedy read a statement in support to the application

Nigel Keen read a statement in support of the application

Nigel Keen read the statement of EPR Ecology in support of the application.

Tracey Glibber, Chair of Milston PC, read a statement in support of the application.

 

Georgina Wright, Senior Planning Officer, noted an update to the published agenda pack, which was that Milston Parish Meeting had raised no objection to the application. She then presented the application which was for change of use of two adjoining agricultural buildings to form a single-family home. Demolition of a further barn and its replacement with a garage/workshop

and associated works. The application was recommended for refusal as detailed in the Officer report.

 

Key issues highlighted included: Principle, heritage, Character and Design, Neighbouring Amenities, Highway Safety, Flooding and Ecology.

 

The site included a collection of agricultural buildings based around a farmyard. Slide 14 showed the four buildings labelled as A,B,C and D.

 

The proposal involved the conversion of buildings A and B into a single four-bedroom dwelling.

 

Building C was to be demolished and replaced with a new garage block.

 

Building D was to be converted into a residential annex but did not form part of this application.

 

Access to site was from the north, on Church Road. The dwellings opposite the site on Church Road were Grade II listed buildings.

 

There were three recommended reasons for refusal, which the Officer then explained.

 

Reason one related to the planning history of the site. In 2017, buildings A & D both received planning permission through class Q of the general permitted development order, for a conversion into two separate dwellings. That permission had since expired.

 

Building B was refused permission for its use as a dwelling under the class Q route in 2017 as it was felt that that building was not capable of conversion. At the subsequent appeal, the Inspector agreed with that reason for refusal and so that building remains in agricultural use.

 

This application proposed the conversion of building A and B into one dwelling, with building A containing the bedrooms and building B to have the living quarters. The two buildings would be linked with a modest single storey glazed link.

 

The application was to be considered under policy CP48 which was more restricted than the class Q process re conversion of buildings. Under class Q, building B was found to be unconvertable. Likewise, for the same reason it did not satisfy CP48.

 

Building A could be a dwelling if the applicant re-applied under class Q.

 

The second reason for refusal was based on flooding, the flood zones currently went into the site, in particular over building B. New build in flood zone 2 was not acceptable unless a sequential test was done to look at alternatives outside of flood zones 2 and 3. There was an alternative on this site, so this scheme failed the sequential test for flooding.

 

The third reason was due to the river  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

82.

20/05322/VAR: 18 Burford Road, Harnham, SP2 8AN

Variation of condition 5 of planning permission 18/00376/FUL to allow the hours of play in garden nursery from 09:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday

Supporting documents:

Minutes:

Public Participation

Miss Jay read a statement in objection to the application

Ms Argo read a statement on behalf of Mrs Volkes in objection to the application

Mr Flint read a statement in objection to the application.

 

Christos Chrysanthou, Planning Officer, presented the variation application for condition 5 of planning permission 18/00376/FUL [Condition 4 of Variation of condition approval 18/10898/VAR] to allow the hours of play in garden nursery from 09:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday. The application was recommended for approval with conditions as detailed in the Officer report.

 

The site was in a residential area. The variation was in relation to the garden area of the nursery, the times of use and the numbers of children permitted to play at one time.

 

The garden was approx. 26m from rear elevation and 15m wide. The building was set approx. 1.5m away from the boundary.

 

Key issues highlighted included the planning history, in 2012, an appeal was allowed by the planning Inspector for a log cabin that was sited retrospectively. In 2018 there was an application for a single storey flat roof extension to replace the log cabin, this was approved with conditions, relating to the garden use, restricting the times of use as a children’s play area to 09:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday, carried over from the 2012 appeal decision.

 

A variation of condition application was then received, which requested an increase in numbers of children attending the nursery from 45 to 65. The hours of use condition was then adjusted at that time to allow for two separate windows of outdoor play, which were 09:00 – 11:30 and 14:30 – 16:00 Monday to Friday. This was discussed and agreed as acceptable by Public Protection (PP) with a maximum of 15 children playing outside at any one time. To minimise impact on neighbouring amenity.

 

The current application requests to revise the wording of the condition, to revert  to the hours of 09:00 to 18:00, which was considered acceptable by PP, with the restriction of a maximum of 15 at any one time. There would also be an additional condition of a restriction of amplified music being played outside the building at any time during those hours.

 

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions to the officer. In response to queries, it was clarified that the basis for the original condition of the blockage of use of the garden over the lunch time period, was to protect the amenity of the neighbouring area and residents and that it was now felt that with the restriction to a maximum of 15 children able to play outside at one time, it was considered that allowing the hours to revert to 09:00 to 18:00 was acceptable.

 

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

Local Member Cllr Sven Hocking then spoke in objection to the application, noting that he completely agreed with the points of the three speakers in objection.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

83.

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

 

Actions

Search

This website