Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Brian Dalton.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 24 June 2010 (copy herewith).

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 June 2010 were approved and signed as a correct record by the Chairman.

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

Councillor Jose Green declared a personal interest in Item No.6 - Salisbury & South Wilts Sports Club, Wilton Road, Salisbury, SP2 9NY. She explained that part of the site belonged Wilton House where she was an occasional guide. She would stay and participate in debate but not vote on the matter.

The Chairman explained the meeting procedure to the members of the public.

The Chairman noted that Olivier Marigold, Senior Planning Officer would be leaving the authority shortly and thanked him for all his help and assistance in the past.

Members of the public who wish to speak either in favour or against an application 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. 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.

The committee noted the rules on public participation.

To inform Members on the proposed changes to the design of the proposed sports pavilion building, previously considered as part of application S/2008/2089. 

Public Participation:

John Youings spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Chris Cochrane, the local member, spoke in support of the application

The senior planning officer outlined the application. Under consideration were a number of changes to note and approve as part of an ongoing application. 1 letter of additional correspondence had been received.

Councillors received clarification of the positioning of the building within the site, and on the reasons for the change in design.

Resolved:

To approve the application with the amended plans for the sports pavilion, and subject to the previously requested S106 agreement and conditions (or any revised terms and conditions thought appropriate due to the change of design) - as per option 4.1a contained in the officer’s report.

To update the Committee in respect of progress towards resolving the various breaches of planning control at this site.

The Lead Principal Enforcement officer updated the committee in respect of progress towards resolving the various planning breaches at the site. He explained that the section 106 agreement agreed by the landowner and Wiltshire Council was not included but summarised in the attached report.

Questions from Councillors were received regarding 2 ongoing planning applications as referred to in paragraph 6 of the officer’s report. The officer clarified that both applications were retrospective in nature seeking 1) to gain permission to display two advertisements at the entrance to the site and 2) to retain those physical elements of the Caravan site rally field which require planning permission.

Resolved

To note the contents of the report.

To receive details of completed and pending appeals (copy herewith).

The committee received details of the following appeals;

Decisions

S/2009/1778 - 18 Folkestone Road, Salisbury – WR – Delegated – Dismissed

S/900/0843 - Rear of 6-12 Ringwood Avenue, Boscombe Down, Amesbury – WR – Committee - Dismissed

S/2009/1885 - 19 Southbourne Way, Porton – HH – Delegated – Dismissed

Resolved

That the report be noted

To consider and determine planning applications in the attached schedule.

Public Participation:

Mrs Shirley Maple spoke in objection to the application on behalf of the residents of Wellington Way.

Mr Derek Brown spoke in objection to the application on behalf of the residents of Queen Alexandra road.

Councillor Jo Broom of Salisbury City Council, local ward member, spoke on behalf of local residents in objection to the application.

Councillor John Rooney, Chair of Salisbury City Council’s Planning & Transportation Committee spoke in objection to the application.

Councillor Chris Cochrane, local member, said that whilst he felt that the development of the site was desirable and he felt that issues such as parking and appearance could be resolved, his key concern was in respect of access to the bungalows off Queen Alexandra Road.

The Planning officer outlined the application, which was recommended for refusal.

During the debate were raised by several Councillors surrounding a lack of adequate vehicular access to the site, in particular concerns were expressed that the access road was not wide enough for emergency vehicles. There was also some concern about overdevelopment and the scarcity of car parking available nearby.

Resolved

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons

1.    The proposed development, by reason of the design and layout of the dwellings, the off-street parking in front of the dwellings on Wellington Way and the parking/turning area for the bungalows creates a poor living environment that is vehicle dominated. In conjunction with the tandem/backland arrangement which is not in keeping with the predominant scale and character of the area and by reason of the close proximity of the access road to no.94 Queen Alexandra Road detract from the general amenities of the occupiers of the dwellings on Queen Alexandra Road which back on to the site by way of vehicle-related noise and disturbance associated with the use of the access and the parking/turning area. Furthermore, by reason of the siting of the dwelling on Plot 6 in close proximity to the boundary with no. 1 Wellington Way and no.21 Roberts Road, the proposed development would appear overbearing and result in a loss of daylight/sunlight to the detriment of the amenities of the occupants of these neighbouring properties. 

As such, the proposal would be contrary to Policies G2, D2 and H8 of the Adopted Salisbury District Local Plan (June 2003) that seek to ensure that development is acceptable in the context of the character and appearance of the area. 

2. The proposed residential development is considered by the Local Planning Authority to be contrary to Policy R2 of the Adopted Replacement Salisbury District Local Plan, as appropriate provision towards public recreational open space has not been made.

Informative 1

It should be noted that the reason given above relating to Policy R2 of the Adopted Replacement Salisbury District Local Plan could be overcome if all the relevant parties agree to enter into a Section 106 legal agreement or if appropriate by condition, in accordance with the standard requirement for recreational public open space.

Public Participation:

Cllr Roger Fisher, of Amesbury Town Council, spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr John Noeken, the local member spoke in objection to the application

The Planning Officer presented the report which was recommended for approval. Following a short debate during which clarification was sought on the orientation of some of the proposed buildings, and the location of the windows, it was

Resolved

To refuse the application for the following reasons

1) The proposal by reason of the height and positioning of flats 7 to 13 Close to the Northern Boundary with neighbouring properties in Pointers Way and the overall number of units on site as a whole is considered to have an adverse impact on the visual amenities of neighbouring properties and represents overdevelopment of the site contrary to policies G2, D2 and H16 of the saved policies of the Salisbury district council local plan.

2) The proposed residential development is considered by the local planning authority to be contrary to policy R2 of the saved policies of the Salisbury district local plan as appropriate provision towards public recreational open space has not been made.

Public Participation:

Mr John White spoke in objection to the application

Mrs Valerie Davie spoke in objection to the application

Mr Michael Beese spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Roger Fisher, Amesbury Town Council spoke in objection to the application

The Planning Officer presented the report which was recommended for approval. He drew Councillors attention to late correspondence in which two extra conditions were included.

A debate ensued during which concerns regarding the layout of the site,the possibility for crime and disorder, the size and construction of the boundary fence and the probable hours of operation were raised.

Resolved

To refuse the application for the following reason

(1) The proposed development, by reason of its design, layout and the close proximity to nearby residential dwellings, particularly the circulation arrangement around the proposed kiosk, the height of the proposed fencing, and the potential for anti-social behaviour, would harm the amenities of adjacent dwellings, contrary to saved policy G2 of the Adopted Salisbury District Local Plan

Public Participation:

Brigadier Andrew Durkin spoke in objection to the proposal

Mr Michael Beese spoke in support of the application

Cllr Roger Fisher, of Amesbury Town Council spoke in objection to the application

The Planning Officer presented the report and explained that the application was a Section 73 application, to vary the conditions of an existing (granted) application, namely the store’s delivery hours, and the store’s appearance.

There was a recess at 21.23 to enable the chairman to receive legal guidance.

The meeting resumed at 21.41.

Following a debate during which concerns were raised regarding the hours of operation it was

Resolved:

In relation to the external appearance of the building, it is considered that the changes made by the applicant represent an upgrade of the store design in terms of sustainable measures which will enhance the environment, and would comply with sustainability policies (G1) as contained within the saved policies of the former Salisbury District Council Local Plan. It is not considered that the amendments proposed would have a significant effect on the amenity (in visual terms) of surrounding properties. The council considers that the removal of condition 20 (of planning permission reference S/2008/0572) to allow 24 hour deliveries to the store, as imposed by the secretary of state, would have an adverse effect in terms of noise and disturbance on the amenities of adjacent residential properties in Annetts Close contrary to policy G2(vi) of the Salisbury District Council local plan saved policies.

Therefore for the reasons above planning permission be granted subject to:

Completion of a legal agreement under Section 106 of the TCPA 1990 linking the planning permission hereby granted to the S106 legal agreement dated 30^th March 2009, which relates to the development of the site under the previous planning permission reference S/2008/0572, so that the previous S106 agreement dated 30^th March 2009 applies to the development pursuant to this permission

And subject to the following conditions:

 1         The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of five years from the date of this permission

Reason - to comply with the provisions of section 91 and  92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to reflect the size and nature of the development

 2         Before development is commenced  a schedule of materials and finishes and where so required by the Local Planning Authority  samples of such materials and finishes  to be used for the external walls and roofs of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority  Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details

Reason - To secure a harmonious form of development

3          The development shall be carried out in accordance with the submitted land contamination details as approved by letter dated 8th June 2010

Reason - In order to ensure any contamination at the site is adequately

remediated.

4          The development shall be carried out in acordance with the submitted hard and soft landscaping plans as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 70d

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.