Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies or substitutions for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Magnus MacDonald, who was substituted by Councillor Gordon King.

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2015.

The minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2015 were presented.

Resolved:

To approve as a correct record and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2015.

To receive any announcements through the Chair.

There were no Chairman’s Announcements.

The Chairman gave details of the exits to be used in the event of an emergency.

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

Councillor Andrew Davis stated that although he had considered application 14/05980/FUL - Fiarview House, Gypsy Lane, Warminster -  as a member of the Planning Committee of Warminster Town Council, he would be considering the application with an open mind.

As declared at the previous meeting, Councillor John Knight that although he had considered application 14/02929/FUL - Ravenscroft Nursing Home, 44 Hilperton Road, Trowbridge -  as a member of the Planning Committee of Trowbridge Town Council, he would be considering the application with an open mind.

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 2.50pm 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 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 (acting on behalf of the Corporate Director) no later than 5pm on Wednesday 28 January 2015.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 welcomed all present. He then explained the rules of public participation and the procedure to be followed at the meeting.

The following written councillor question and response was received and noted:

Question from Councillor Ernie Clark, Hilperton Division:

Condition 10 of planning application (W)04/01389/FULES provides:

10           Notwithstandingthe details shownon thesubmitted drawingsno development shalltake placeuntil detailsof thepedestrian crossingswhere footwaysand footpaths crossthe road,and detailsof thepedestrian andbridleway crossing atMiddle Lanehave beensubmitted to,and approvedin writingby, theLocal Planning Authority.

“ Zebra crossingswill beprovided onthe newroad adjacentto the"Fieldways roundaboutand tothe "WykeRoad" roundabout.The developmentshall be carriedout inaccordance withthe approveddetails beforethe roadis openedto traffic....... “                                   ·                                          ·

 REASON:In theinterests of highwaysafety, inorder tosafeguard amenity,and to facilitateaccess forall

What was the wording for this condition as it appeared in the officers recommendation in the agenda papers for the meeting when this condition was agreed? i.e. I wish to find out whether the wording of the condition was amended during the course of the planning meeting.’

Response

Condition 10, as agreed by the meeting (minute 294 refers) reads as follows:

Amendment of condition 10 to read as follows: -

Notwithstanding the details shown on the submitted drawings, no development shall take place until details of the pedestrian crossings where footways and footpaths cross the road, and details of the pedestrian and bridleway crossing at Middle Lane have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Zebra crossings will be provided on the new road adjacent to the “Fieldways” roundabout and to the “Wyke Road” roundabout. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details before the road is opened to traffic. Kissing gates suitable for disabled use shall be provided where footpaths intersect the road.

REASON: In the interests of highway safety, in order to safeguard amenity, and to facilitate access for all.

Condition 10, as recommended by the officer reads as follows:

Notwithstanding the details shown on the submitted drawings no development shall take place until details of the pedestrian crossings where footpaths cross the road, and details of the pedestrian and bridleway crossing at Middle Lane have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and the crossings shall be complete and operational before the road is opened to traffic.

REASON: In order to safeguard amenity.

The Committee considered the following right of way application:

Public Participation

 Francis Morland spoke in objection to the application.

The Right of Way Officer presented the report which outlined the recommendation that the order be confirmed by the Secretary of State.

Members of the Committee had the opportunity to ask technical questions regarding the proposed order.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

The Local Member, Councillor Horace Prickett, spoke in support of the proposals, and following a motion being proposed it was,

Resolved

That the Wiltshire Council West Ashton 1 (part) Extinguishment Order 2014 and the Wiltshire Council West Ashton 1 (part) Creation Order 2014 be submitted to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs with the recommendation that the Orders be confirmed and the objection is dealt with under the written representation scheme.

Reason for decision:

Officers believe it is expedient to extinguish the path through Manor View and its garden as in the light of a satisfactory alternative there is no need for the public to use this route. It is necessary to confirm the concurrent Creation Order providing for a footpath in substitution for the section of footpath to be extinguished to ensure public access along West Ashton Footpath 1 is maintained.

To consider and determine the following planning applications:

Public Participation

Mr Michael Knight spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Martin Somervell MBE spoke in objection to the application.

Rev Denis Brett spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Paul Walsh spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Sue Fraser spoke on behalf of Warminster Town Council in objection to the application.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the report which recommended the application for approval subject to conditions. Key issues were stated to include the principle of the development, and impacts upon the character and appearance on the area and local amenity. A committee site visit took place prior to the meeting.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer, where it was confirmed that as Fairview House was not a Listed Building, the process for demolition was simpler than would otherwise be the case.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

The local Unitary Member, Councillor Andrew Davis, then spoke in objection to the application.

A debate followed, where the potential loss of amenity and extent of any overlooking was assessed within the context of the site and local area was discussed, along with restriction of working hours during construction and details regarding affordable homes provision, in the event permission was approved.

At the conclusion of debate, it was

Resolved

To delegate authority to the Area Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to a legal agreement to secure the following:

a)    4 units of affordable housing

b)   A financial contribution of £16,700 towards public open space;

c)    A financial contribution of £4,501 towards swimming pools and/or upgrades to boathouse in Warminster Park;

d)   A financial contribution of £5,158 towards sports halls; and

e)    A financial contribution of £1,320 towards the Wessex Stone Curlew Project; and, that permission be subject to the following conditions:

Public Participation

Mrs Angela Clements spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Richard Borrows, agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the report which recommended the application for approval subject to conditions and a s.106 legal agreement. Key issues were stated to include the scale of the proposed development and visual impact. A committee site visit took place prior to the meeting.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officers, where details were sought on the differences in land levels between the application site and neighbouring properties.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

A debate followed, where the level of parking provision on the site was considered and assessed, along with the suitability of amenity space and the impact on the wider area.

At the conclusion of debate it was,

Resolved:

That permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:

Public Participation

Mr Michael Oleszynski spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Robert Hillman spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Trevor Barclay Jenkins spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Chris Beaver, agent, spoke in support of the application.

The Senior Planning Officer introduced a report which recommended that planning permission be granted subject to conditions and a s.106 legal agreement. Key issues were stated to include the principle of the proposed development of 8 dwellings, the impact on neighbouring amenity and access and parking considerations.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer, where clarity was requested over the proposed conditions and informatives, and in response to queries it was stated that in response to new government guidance, affordable homes provision could not be requested on sites with fewer than 10 dwellings.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

The local Unitary Member, Councillor John Knight, then spoke in support of the application.

A debate followed, where the principle of the number of dwellings on the site was considered, along with the extent and nature of the s.106 contributions recommended, and an assessment of the impact on the neighbouring area.

At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved

To delegate authority to the Area Development Manager to grant planning permission subject to a legal agreement to secure an index-linked financial contribution of £3,296 towards the provision of open space facilities, and subject to the following conditions:

Public Participation

Mrs Margaret Ryan spoke in objection to the application.

Mrs Audrey Hill spoke in objection to the application.

Mr Ben Pearce spoke in support of the application.

The Senior Planning Officer presented a report which recommended that the proposed variation to the originally proposed conditions be granted to permit changes to storage of materials on the application site.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on Highways concerns, and it was clarified that Wiltshire Council Highways officers had made initial objections to the proposed variation, but that these had been withdrawn.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

The local Unitary Member, Councillor Roy While, then spoke in objection to the application.

A debate followed, where the impact on Highways of the proposed variation, and whether that impact was severe was considered, and whether an increase in generated traffic would have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring amenity.

At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved:

That Planning Permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

The proposed variation to conditions imposed on application W/12/01907/FUL would have an unacceptable and inappropriate impact on Redstocks lane and neighbouring amenities. The increased on-site storage proposal would result in an increased generation of traffic using the narrow lane located off the A365, and whilst there is an established use for the site, the proposed expansion for the use of the site has had and would continue to have consequential and detrimental unsustainable highway impact contrary to the provisions contained within the second and third bullet points of paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Councillor Jonathon Seed left the meeting after this item.

Public Participation

Mr Martin Williams spoke in objection to the application.

The Planning Officer introduced a report which recommended that planning permission be approved subject to conditions. Key issues were stated to include the principle of the proposed two storey extension, the design and scale of the proposals and impact on neighbouring amenity.

Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer.

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the Committee, as detailed above.

The local Unitary Member, Councillor Trevor Carbin, then spoke in objection to the application.

A debate followed, where the scale of the proposal was assessed within the context of the surrounding area and its impact on the neighbouring properties. Details on parking provision were also sought.

At the conclusion of debate, it was,

Resolved:

To REFUSE planning permission for the following reason:

The rear extension by reason of its size, mass, bulk and height would result in a substantial addition to the dwellinghouse which accommodates a narrow plot; and it would lead to an unacceptable level of overbearing and overlooking to the immediate neighbours at No 220 and No 222 Melksham Road which would result in loss of amenity and privacy contrary to the requirements of Adopted Wiltshire Core Strategy Core Policy 57.

The Committee requested it be recorded that the resolution to refuse permission was unanimous.

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

Councillor Ernie Clark’s submitted question and response was received, and it was agreed to include it under Item 14 of these Minutes.